EFFECT OF WATER STRESS AND NITROGEN FERTILIZATION ON THE PHENOLOGY OF SORGHUM (Sorghum bicolor L.) IN SULAIMANI REGION
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, UNIVERSITY OF SULAIMANI IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN (FIELD CROPS - CROP PHYSIOLOGY)
By Shwana Ahmad Hussain B.Sc. in Field Crops University of Sulaimani (2003)
Supervised by Dr. Aram Abbas Mohammed Lecturer
2011
1432
2711
لةسةر في َ ل َ جاي ِروو ك طةن ة شام
كارتيَ دن ط شار ئاو و ثةيي نايت َوجي سث ) (Sorghum bicolor L.لة ناوضة س َي ان
نامةكة ثيَش ةشة بة ئةنج ومةن فاكةلَت انستة كشت كالَيةكا -ان َ س يَ ان و ك بةشيَك لة ثيَ اويستيةكان بةد ست هيَ ان ب ِوانامة ماستةر لة انست كشت كا َ (بةش بةروب وم كيَ َطة-فسي َ ل َ يا بةروب وم كيَ َطة ) دا
لةاية ش انة أح حسيَن بةكارل َ ري َ س انستة كشت كالَيةكا -بةش بةروب وم
كيَ َطة
ان َ س يَ ان 3002
بةسةرثةرشت د.ئارا ع اس مح مام َ ستا 341
11ك
1
تأثي الج د المائي التسميد ال ايت جي ى ع ى في ولوجيا ن ا ال ال يضاء ) (Sorghum bicolor L.في م ط الس يماني سال م دم الى مج س فاك تي الع و ال اعي -جامع الس يماني كج ء من متط ا نيل ش اد الماجستي في الع و ال اعي (المحاصيل الح ي -فس ج المحاصيل)
من ق ل شوانه أحمد حسين بكالو يو
في ع و
اعي -قسم المحاصيل الح ي 3002
بأش اف
د.ئا ا ع ا
محمد
مد
3412
2711
2011
بسم ه الرح ن الرحيم ي ْرفع ه ه اله ين آمنوا م ْنك ْم واله ين أوتوا ا ْلع ْلم د جات و ه ٌ ه ب ا ت ْع لو خبير صدق ه العظيم
]11[سورة المجادلة أية
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
Allah will exalt in degree those of you who believe and those who have been granted knowledge. And Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do.
Allah told the Truth Al-Mujadala ]11[
Acknowledgments First of all, I thank Allah for granting me the will and strength with which this research was accomplished. I would like to express my deep and sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Aram Abbas Muhammad. His wide knowledge and his logical way of thinking have been of great value for me. My special thanks go to Dr. Abdulsalam Abdulrahman the head of Crop Science Department. I have a special thanks to my thesis committee members; In particular, I would like to thank Dr, Sherwan Ismael Tofiq for his support and valuable remarks and help in statistical analysis. I wish to thank all my friends who helped me especially, Dr. Nawroz Abdul-razzak Tahir, Dr. Dana Azad, Mr. Soran Ma'ruf, and Mr. Jamal Mahmoud for their helps during the research period. Special thanks are also due to Mr. Dana Ahmad in soil Science Department for their helps in soil analysis. I would like acknowledge the help of staff of Agricultural Research Center in Kanipanka especially Mr.Bakr. Finally, I feel indebted to whomever has helped me with my work and whom I have not mentioned his or her name.
Shwana
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Sorghum or (Sorghum bicolor), is a cultivated grass species, which is considered as the fifth most important cereal crops for human consumption in the world being surpassed only by rice, wheat, barley and corn. Sorghum kernel has a high yield potential and the world production in 2010 exceeded 59.513TMT. Although it originated in northern Africa, and is now cultivated widely in tropical and subtropical regions, and grow in harsh environments where other crops do not grow well, but yields in Africa and India remains very low. The United States is the world's largest producer of sorghum kernel followed by India and Nigeria. The United States harvested approximately 9.7 million acres of sorghum in 2009/2010. Harlan and de Wet (1972) divided cultivated sorghum into five basic groups or races: bicolor, guinea, caudatum, kafir and durra. The wild type and shatter cane are considered as two other spikelet types of S. tricolor (Teshome et al., 1997). Sorghum kernel, grown primarily for food uses can be divided into milo, kafir, hegari, feterita and hybrids (Purseglove, 1972). Sorghum has unique properties that make it well suited for food uses, the reason by millions of people in the semi-arid tropics of Asia and Africa is considered as the most important staple foods. It is one of the crops sustain the lives of the poorest rural people and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Some sorghum varieties are rich in antioxidants and all sorghum varieties are gluten-free, an attractive alternative for wheat allergy sufferers. In many parts of the world, sorghum has traditionally been used in food products and various food items;
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Unleavened bread, cookies, cakes, and malted beverages are made from this versatile kernel Sorghum is also an important animal feed used in countries like the U.S., Mexico, South America and Australia. Good-quality sorghums are available with a nutritional feeding value that is equivalent to that of corn. Sorghum can be processed to further improvement. Its feed value and techniques such as grinding, crushing, steaming, steam flaking, popping and extruding have all been used to enhance the kernel for feeding. The products are then fed to beef and dairy cattle, laying hens and poultry. Sorghum is one of the most drought tolerant cereal crops currently under cultivation, while water shortage is one of the most important restricting factors in crop production in the world (Umar, 2006). Although sorghum is a C crop and uses nitrogen (N), CO , solar radiation and water more efficiently than most C crops (Anten et al., 1995and Young and Long, 2000), and N nutrient is still one of major factors limiting crop yield, but it grow with limited water resources and usually without application of any fertilizers or other inputs by a multitude of small-holder farmers in many countries. Therefore, and because they are mostly consumed by disadvantaged groups, they are often referred to as "coarse kernel" or "poor people's crops" (Jaynes et al., 2001). It offers farmers the ability to reduce costs on irrigation and other on-farm expenses. The International Water Management Institute (IWMI) warns that by the year 2025, 25 percent of the world's population will experience severe water scarcity. However, water productivity in both irrigated and rain-fed acres can be increased through the use of more water-use efficient crops, like sorghum. Fertilizers are an efficient exogenous source of plant nutrients. Balanced fertilizer use, along with complementary use of organic and bio- sources can help reverse environmental degradation by providing much needed nutrients to the soil, thereby increasing crop yields (Bumb and Baanante, 1996). Low usage
2
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
of phosphorus in relation to nitrogen has been identified as one of the major factors limiting higher crop yields. This is very small quantity as compared to the crop requirement (Akhtar et al., 2002). The current situation of agriculture production in Kurdistan suffers from several risks that prevent drawing advantages in the two main sectors, but drought and water scarcity remains the true crises which needs to be faced by implementation of convenient methods in several units of production, in which regulated deficit irrigation is one of the effective factors, as well as some other important factors such as alternative crops as sorghum which may grow and produce under condition of water and fertilization deficit. Therefore, the present study was conducted to investigate the response of sorghum growth and yield under such a condition of RDI and no nutrients supply through study of different vegetative and reproductive characters like growth period root: shoot ratio, biomass accumulation and LAI expansion along the growth period.
3
CHAPTER TWO LITRATURE REVIEW 2.1 Response of sorghum to water stress: Sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L) Moench] is a C4 crop and uses nitrogen (N), CO2, solar radiation and water more efficiently than most C 3 crops (Anten et al., 1995and Young and Long, 2000). Although adequate supply of N to crops is fundamental to optimize crop yields, mismanagement of N, such as excessive N application, can result in contamination of groundwater (Jaynes et al., 2001). Therefore, efficient monitoring of plant N status and appropriate N fertilizer management are essential to balance the factors of increasing cost of N fertilizer, the demand by the crop, and the need to minimize environmental perturbations, especially water quality (Jaynes et al., 2001). Different varieties might respond differently to fertilizer application under different soil and environmental conditions. The plant nutrition may not only affect the forage production but also improve the quality of forage from view point of its protein contents. Leaf N and chlorophyll (chI) content are important physiological parameters of detecting crop plant N status. N Fertilizer recommendation is traditionally based on soil N status. However, conventional laboratory methods for quantifying these variables from destructive sampling of plant tissues and soil N content measurements are time consuming and costly. Water availability is one of the most important factors in plant growth and development. Higher plants exhibit a range of biological, physiological and morphological adaptation in their response to water stress (Robents, 1998). Water shortage influenced various plant processes and attributes leaf-water potential, stomatal resistance, transpiration, net photosynthesis, canopytemperature differences, crop-water-stress index and leaf wilting (Deepak et al., 1995). 4
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Under field conditions, significant correlations between corn N status and leaf reflectance changes were obtained when leaf N concentration was lower than 3.0% of leaf dry weight (Graeff and Claupein, 2003). Gono, (1990) studied the effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on the kernel yield of sorghum and reported that nitrogen application significantly increased the number of kernels per head, kernel weight and kernel yield. It was found by (Arya and Niranjan, 1995) that application of 60kg N ha-1 and 17.6 kg P ha-1 gave significant kernel yield of 1410 kg ha-1. In general, N deficiency usually decreases leaf ChI content resulting in an increase in leaf reflectance in both green (centered 550 nm) and red edge (700-720 nm) ranges (Daughtry et al., 2000and Zhao et al., 2003). 2.2 Vegetative criteria 2.2.1 Number of leaf per plant: Number of leaves in sorghum varied between genotypes and ranged between 13-16 by stay green entries and 15-18 by rabi adapted genotypes and also depends on the cultivar and the management practices (Rao et al., 2004 and Anon, 2004). Besides, the number of leaves, rate of leaf production and time to panicle initiation also varied with the cultivar, temperature, and photoperiod (Quinby et al., 1973). Krishnamurthy et al. (1974) also observed that the leaf number and area varied with genotypes and that the hybrid CBE-X had more number of leaves with high leaf area per plant and consequently had more leaf area duration over other genotypes, including locals, Choudhari (1977) suggested that seven leaves per plant in rabi sorghum genotypes were sufficient for maximum kernel production, although the genotypes differed in their leaf area requirement. While the leaf number was reduced under nitrogen stress alone, leaf number as well as leaf size were reduced under both nitrogen and moisture stress in sorghum (Verma et al., 1983). 5
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Hou et al. (1987) reported that drought tolerance was strongly associated not only with increased number of green leaves but also with increased chlorophyll content. The final leaf number was affected by irrigated or rainfed conditions in sorghum, but the time and duration required for leaf initiation and full development was much lesser in irrigated than in unirrigated conditions (Anonymous, 1988). Wanous et al. (1991) reported that visual ratings for the percentage of green leaf area and for the number of green leaves were highly correlated with measured green leaf area values under drought condition. Jeyaprakash et al. (1997) and Kadam et al. (2002) found that significant differences in number of leaves among the genotypes were positively correlated with kernel yield. 2.2.2 Leaf area (LA) and (LAI): Leaf area is the basis of growth and yield and it depends on the number, rate of expansion, and size of leaves and their senescence. Narrow and erect leaves will have lower leaf are which might be necessary to reduce the depletion of soil moisture due to transpiration. But low productivity in rainfed sorghum appears to be only partially due to slower leaf area development and faster leaf senescence. In a field experiment, it was observed that the rate of dry matter accumulation per unit radiation intercepted by the rainfed sorghum was only 67% of irrigated crop (Seetharama et al., 1978). Leaf area (LA) and leaf photosynthetic rates (Pn) are directly associated with plant dry matter (DM) production. Sorghum kernel yield is closely related to green LA (Borrell and Douglas, 1997) and leaf Pn (Locke and Hons, 1988) and (Peng et al., 1991). Although C4 crops have higher photosynthetic N use efficiencies as compared with C3 crops (Young and Long, 2000), N supply and plant N status considerably affected sorghum leaf area index (Locke and Hons, 1988).
6
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Leaf Area Index (LAI) is the ratio of total upper leaf surface of vegetation divided by the surface area of the land on which the vegetation grows. LAI is a dimensionless value, typically ranging from 0 for bare ground to 6 for a dense forest. LAI is a dimensionless variable and was first defined as the total onesided area of photosynthetic tissue per unit ground surface area (Watson, 1947). For broadleaved trees with flat leaves, this definition is usable because both sides of a leaf have the same surface area. Some authors therefore proposed a projected leaf area in order to take into account the irregular form of needles and leaves (Smith, 1991and Bolstad and Gower, 1990). Myneni et al., (1997) consequently defined LAI as the maximal projected leaf area per unit ground surface area. Within the context of the computation of the total radiation interception area of plant elements, and based on calculations of the mean projection coefficients of several convex and concave objects of different angular distributions, Lang (1991) and Chen and Black (1992) suggested that half the total interception (non-projected) area per unit ground surface area would be a more suitable definition of LAI for non-flat leaves than projected leaf area. The LAI of vegetation depends on species composition, developmental stage, and seasonality. Furthermore the LAI is strongly dependent on the prevailing site conditions and the management practices. The sum of these factors, combined with the difference in assessment methods, may therefore lead to widely varying LAI-values as is demonstrated in the relevant literature. Published LAI-values of forests range from 0.40 for Quercus petraea (Matus) Liebl. (Le Dantec et al., 2000) to 14 for Pseudotsuga menziesii (Mirb.) Franco (Turner et al., 2000). In general, the highest values reported previously are for particular coniferous canopies. Beadle (1993) reported
7
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
that maxima between 6 and 8 are typically observed for deciduous forest and between 2 and 4 for annual crops. After leaf collection, leaf area can be calculated by means of either planimetric or gravimetric techniques (Daughtry, 1990). The planimetric approach is based on the principle of the correlation between the individual leaf area and the number of area units covered by that leaf in a horizontal plane. 2.2.3 Leaf area index (LAI) Watson (1947) reported the role of LAI in dry matter production. Eick and Hanway (1965) suggested that the relationship between photosynthetic rate at 60 DAS and the increase in dry matter from 60 to 90 DAS was found to be positively associated with an increase in plant population and resulted in higher LAI. The differences in CGR at early growth stages of sorghum were mainly attributed to leaf area development, especially to the initial leaf area but not leaf growth rate (Fisher and Wilson, 1975). Further, they studied the relationship between LAI and NAR and concluded that there was no greater improvement on yield due to unit increment in LAI. Kudasomannavar, (1974) reported that early planted sorghum was exposed to lower water stress and has been evidenced by lower diffusive resistance prior to headings and small reduction in LAI after heading compared to late planted sorghum, growth analysis in sorghum hybrids indicated that LAI increased throughout the growth period but the increase was less rapid after 50 days after sowing (Santos et al., 1979). Lafarge and Hammer (2002) results showed that partitioning of shoot assimilate between leaf, stem and head was also common across treatments up to anthesis, at both plant and culm levels. The relationship with thermal time (TT) from emergence of specific leaf area (SLA) and LAR of tillering plants did not change with plant density. In contrast, SLA of uniculm plants was appreciably lower under low-density conditions at any given TT from emergence. This was interpreted as a consequence of assimilate surplus arising 8
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
from the inability of the plant to compensate by increasing the leaf area when a culm could produce. It is argued that the stability of the extinction coefficient, RUE and plant LAR of tillering plants observed in these conditions provides a reliable way to predict leaf area production regardless of plant density. The kernel yield was closely related with CGR and LAI at one week before heading. But these correlations as well as those between kernel yield and total shoot dry weight were less close in the spring than in the autumn sorghum crop (Lin and Yeh, 1990). Similarly, Joshi and Jamadagni (1990) reported that leaf area index (LAI), leaf area duration (LAD) during kernel filling stage, high dry matter accumulation and harvest index were considered to be the most important physiological characters responsible for high yield. Ravindranath and Shivraj, (1983) reported that LAI, CGR, NAR, and kernel yield were decreased due to water stress, and kernel yield was mostly controlled by LAI. However, the glossy genotypes had high LAI values even under water stress and it was of 1.9 for M 35-1 at peak stage of stress. Hiremath and Parvatikar (1985) found that in spring season, the LAI values and differences of LAI among genotypes were smaller in range than in autumn season. There was a positive association between LAI and CGR (Eastin, 1983; Myers et al., 1986 and Rao et al., 1998) thus, LAI can be taken as an index to indicate satisfactorily the ability of the plant to produce kernel yield. But, the moisture stress during flowering reduces the LAI and kernel yield per plant (Bakheit, 1989). Sorghum hybrids have larger LAI and leaf area duration than the local cultivars, which maintained better water status (Blum, 1991and Blum et al., 1992). The poor plant water status of hybrids was partially ascribed to their larger LAI. The LAI of vegetation depends on species composition, developmental stage, and seasonality. Furthermore, the LAI is strongly dependent on the prevailing site conditions and the management practices. The sum of these 9
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
factors, combined with the difference in assessment methods, may therefore lead to widely varying LAI-values as is demonstrated in the relevant literature. There are two main categories of procedures to estimate LAI: direct and indirect methods. The former group consists of methods measuring leaf area in a direct way, while the latter group consists of methods where LAI is derived from more easily (in terms of time, workload, technology) measurable parameters (Fassnacht et al., 1994 and Gower et al., 1999). 2.2.4 Days to 50% flowering, and Days from 50%flowering to PM: Though the flowering is controlled genetically, but it could be modified by the environmental factors and is relatively important from the point of kernel yield. Since spring sorghums often experience terminal stress, earliness is an important drought escape mechanism. Furthermore more, sorghum has been found to be more sensitive to water stress during flowering and early kernel filling stages compared to vegetative growth stages (Seetharama, 1986). Several workers reported that there is a differential response in respect of days to 50% flowering under receding soil moisture conditions. Blum (1970) reported that sorghum grown under stored soil moisture condition undergoes increasing water stress with advancement in crop growth due to depletion of soil moisture. Late planting of most common temperate genotypes causes reduction in number of days to floral initiation (Tauli et al., 1964; Quinby, 1967 and Sticker and Pauli, 1969). Reddy and Rao (1978) reported that with the increasing number of days from 50% flowering to physiological maturity, there was an improvement in yield of hybrids due to increased number of days available for dry matter accumulation in the kernel during GS III stage. Verma et al. (1983) observed that water stress not only delayed flowering but also reduced the kernel weight.
Norem et al. (1985) found that days 10
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
required for anthesis were significantly less for drought tolerance lines than for medium and low tolerant lines. The initial increase in inflorescence development in stressed plants was earlier than control plants, but plants which
had
experienced stress just prior to inflorescence initiation had faster development (Hermus et al., 1982). Mathews et al. (1990b) found that drought delayed the panicle initiation but once started, the length of reproductive period increased in resistant lines and decreased in susceptible ones. Craufurd and Peacock (1993) concluded that the genotype performance in water limited environments was strongly related to phenology were also emphasized the importance of the timing of stress and the growth rate during flowering in determining kernel number and kernel yield. Kamoshita et al. (1996) observed a delay in phenology with water deficit. Genotypes which had good capability in relation to the timing of emergence, floral initiation, anthesis, and maturity to temperature and photoperiod under limiting conditions was reported by (Hammer et al., 1989 and Muchow and Carberry, 1990. Kadam et al. (2002) revealed significant differences in their phenology were observed and M 35-1 required more number of days for 50% flowering, while the same genotype took maximum duration from 50% flowering to maturity and produced higher kernel yield (Shivalli, 2000). There was a negative correlation between days to 50% flowering and HI (Blum, 1970). While, it showed significant positive correlation with kernel yield (Youngquist et al. , 1990; Jeyaprakash et al, 1997; Alam et al., 2001 and Patil et al., 2003). In contrast, negative association with kernel yield showed that delayed flowering and maturity provides more time for plant to grow and produce more biomass which contributed towards more yield (Choudhari, 1992; Patel et al., 1994 and Mahalakshmi and Bidinger, 2002). Blum et al. (1977) observed that early maturity is associated with reduced water use in sorghum resulting from increased root density and root: shoot ratio.
11
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
The results of Makinde et al. (2011) indicated to that the season 2010 crops had relatively longer growth duration, received more rainfall than season 2009 (692 vs. 487.2 mm) while 2009 experienced warmer temperature during establishment cum early vegetative stage than 2010 season (33.2 vs. 32°C) and (28.5 vs. 27°C) during the reproductive phase for season 2009 and 2010, respectively. The mean kernel yields of sorghum cultivars were significantly higher in the season 2009 especially in okra combination than in the season 2010. Perhaps, this was due to higher mean soil temperature of 28 and 26°C at 5 and 20 cm in 2009 season compared with season 2010 when mean soil temperature was 27 and 25°C at 5 and 20 cm, respectively. 2.3 Dry matter accumulation and its distribution: Dry matter accumulation and distribution is an important factor indicating partitioning efficiency of photosynthetic assimilated. In general, soil moisture determines the distribution and accumulation of dry matter in different plant parts. Further, the moisture stress occurring at various stages ultimately influence the economic yield. The dry matter distribution in different plant parts of sorghum revealed that pre flowering contribution is only 12% of kernel weight and 93% is due to assimilation by top head and four leaves (Fischer and Wilson, 1971). This may be due to their close proximity to the panicle, more interception of light and higher metabolic efficiency due to relatively young age. Rao and Singh (1978) observed that stem weight of sorghum increased up to first week after anthesis and then fell to the level much lower than that at anthesis and thereafter declined. The decline in both stem weight and sugar content were due to remobilization of stem dry matter to the panicle. Wilson et al. (1980) reported that dry matter accumulation rate of the sorghum plants was greatly reduced by the water deficit and it was due to reduced LAI and decreased substrate production rate per unit leaf area photosynthesis. 12
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Constable and Hearn, (1978) noticed that sorghum outyielded both irrigated and rainfed soybeans (5400 versus 2800 and 1800 kg ha -1, respectively). Soil water deficits during pod filling in soybeans caused early leaf death and cessation of pod filling, thus decreasing yield. Irrigation at approximately 90 mm and 135 mm soil water deficit resulted in similar yields, in sorghum and in Ruse soybeans, there were a significant (17-25%) loss in stem dry weight during kernel filling, which may have been caused by the relocation of stored assimilates. In Bragg soybeans, only the rainfed plants had a loss in stem dry weight during kernel filling. Differences in crop dry weight occurred later than predicted by photosynthesis measurements. Several factors could have contributed to this discrepancy, and we highlight the need for a greater understanding of the contribution from lower leaves and also of the factors affecting the storage and remobilization of reserve assimilates during kernel filling. Wong et al. (1983) found that drought affects the panicle dry weight more than the vegetative parts of the plant, since the water stress normally occurs after the vegetative stage. They also found that most of the genotypes had reduced dry matter production during kernel filling period and later recovered. Hukkeri and Shukla (1983) found significant reduction in fodder yield and dry matter by withholding irrigation during any one or more stages of growth. Garrity et al. (1983) noticed that dry matter and kernel weigh were much less sensitive to season evapotranspiration deficit treatment (irrigation applied throughout the growth stages than the irrigation during kernel filling period), but seasonal water use efficiency in the treatment where irrigation applied throughout the growth stages was substantially higher. Results of Rajcan and Tollenaar (1999), confirmed that greater dry matter accumulation of Pioneer 3902, relative to Pride 5, was associated with greater leaf longevity. Change in stover weight from silking to maturity, an indicator of 13
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
the difference in supply and demand of assimilates during kernel filling, varied from −30% with defoliation to +25% for the no sink treatment. The change was always greater in the new hybrid, indicating that the old hybrid was more source limited. Number of green leaves, an indicator of leaf longevity, was greatest when supply and demand of assimilates during kernel filling were approximately equal. They concluded that the magnitude of drought stress conditioning depends on the genotype, phonological timing of treatment and irrigation regimes employed. Garrity et al. (1984) reported a reduction of kernel and dry matter yield by about 36 and 37% respectively due to water stress. Bishnoi (1983) reported that dry matter production was highest in pearl millet than in sorghum and maize because of higher net photosynthetic rate, LAI and PAR absorption. Hiremath and Parvatikar (1985) noticed that dry matter accumulation in sorghum enhanced with an increase in LAI. However, certain genotypes (SPV 126, SB 3307, SB 2431 and SB 3304) did accumulate large amount of dry matter even with low LAI, due to efficient utilization of limited available water by reducing transpiration loss. Rego et al. (1988) noticed a decrease in dry matter yield and number of leaves expanded after the imposition of high osmotic potential treatment and concluded that plants under relieved water stress regimes produced more dry matter and expanded more leaves than the plants in continuous stress regimes. Muchow and Coates (1986) observed that there was a reduction in leaf dry weight and total dry matter and this decrease might be attributed to reduced LA and leaf abscission which led to a concomitant decrease in the efficiency with which solar radiation was used to accumulate biomass. McCree et al. (1984) revealed that stressed plants accumulated biomass and carbon through the osmotic adjustment with little additional metabolic cost and the carbon
14
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
stored during stress was immediately available for the synthesis of biomass on rewatering. 2.4 Root shoot ratio: The term root and shoot are used here in a botanical sense and refer to the entire aerial and subterranean portions of higher seed plants, respectively (Aung, 1974). In the early part of the twentieth century; shoot-root ratios were used rather extensively to characterize plant response to imposed nutritional changes .Root growth is closely related to whole-plant growth. Root development varies with stages of plant development. This information can guide researchers to the appropriate time for root growth observations during crop growth cycles. Other studies have reported that reduction in root growth may occur at high N supplies (Anderson, 1978and Comfort et al., 1988). High N rates may reduce deep root penetration and decrease potential use of deep soil nutrients and water. Bosenmark (1954) concluded that with high N supplies, root growth stopped completely. Cereal plants have been reported to respond to additional N nutrition through increased growth of the whole plant (Troughton, 1962). Plant roots proliferation depends on the availability of water and minerals in the immediate microenvironment surrounding the root, if the rhizosphere is poor in the nutrients or too dry, root growth is slow, as rhizosphere conditions improve, root growth increases. If fertilizations and irrigation provide abundant nutrients and water, root growth may not keep pace with shoot growth. Plant growth under such conditions becomes carbohydratelimited, and a relatively small root system meets the nutrient needs of the whole plant. Indeed, crops under fertilizations and irrigation allocate more resources to the shoot and reproductive structures than the roots, and this shift in allocation patterns often results in higher yields (Taize and Zeiger, 2006).
15
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5 Reproductive criteria 2.5.1 1000-kernels weight (g): Zhao et al. (1983) stated that 1000-kernel weight and kernel number per panicle were correlated with leaf area and photosynthetic rate. Moisture stress at kernel-filling period had reduced 1000-kernel weight significantly (Bakheit, 1989). Further, some genotypes which were superior in panicle weight and kernel yield also showed moderate stability. The 1000-kernel weight and number of kernel per panicle showed positive correlation with kernel yield (Kadam et al., 2002). Also, 1000-kernel weight and kernel number per plant had a significant positive correlation with kernel and fodder yield (Thombre et al., 1982, Patil, 2002 and Awari et al., 2003). Patil and Prabhakar (2001) noticed that 1000- kernel weight exhibited significant positive correlation with kernel yield under moisture stress. Yadav et al. (2003) reported that the yield reduction in sorghum was related to reduction in both kernel number and kernel size when water stress was imposed at anthesis and early kernel filling stages. Kernel size is an important factor determining final kernel yield and nutritional quality in sorghum (Kriegshauser et al., 2006). Although high kernel mass is offset by low kernel number, hybrids based on this material seem to have higher kernel yield (Tuinstra et al., 2001a). 2.5.2 No. of kernels plant-1: Although it is clear that the number of harvestable seeds per unit area is the dominant yield component in many kernel crops, variations in sorghum KW contribute
greatly
to
final
yield
determination
(Stickler
and
Pauli,
1961; Heinrich et al., 1985and Blum et al., 1997). The pattern of sorghum kernel growth and kernel final weight vary among genotypes as well as among positions in the panicle (Hamilton et al., 1982; Heiniger et al., 1993a, 1993b). 16
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
However, little information exists about the physiological mechanisms controlling these variations. While kernel water relations are useful to understand kernel dry weight differences of some crops (Saini and Westgate, 2000 and Borrás et al., 2004), such data in sorghum are lacking. Early kernel growth involves cellular division and expansion accompanied by water uptake (Egli et al., 1985) and (Westgate and Boyer, 1986). Once maximum water content is reached, maximum kernel volume is attained (Martínez-Carrasco and Thorne, 1979; Jenner, 1979; Egli, 1990andSaini and Westgate, 2000). After maximum water content is reached, water is gradually replaced by dry matter deposition, causing gradual kernel desiccation until a critical moisture content that limits biomass deposition (Egli and TeKrony, 1997and Saini and Westgate, 2000). Kernel moisture content declines throughout kernel filling (Kersting et al., 1961and Westgate and Boyer, 1986) and has been successfully used to estimate kernel developmental stages defined as the fraction of final KW reached at any time during kernel filling. Genotypic differences in sorghum KW are normally related to changes in the rate of kernel filling (Heinrich et al., 1985and Kiniry, 1988). In turn, KW changes in the different positions within the panicle are due to changes in the rate and duration of kernel filling (Heiniger et al., 1993a and Kiniry and Musser, 1988). There is still some disagreement in the current literature on the pattern of KW distribution within the panicle. Some authors have demonstrated KW increases from the base to the apex (Fischer and Wilson, 1975; Hamilton et al., 1982;Heiniger et al., 1993a, 1993b), while others have detected the heaviest kernels in basal positions of the panicle (Kiniry, 1988 and Kiniry and Musser, 1988). If variations in kernel density were the normal case in sorghum, maximum water content (as a maximum volume estimator) would not serve as an early KW predictor when different genotypes or positions within the sorghum panicle are considered.
17
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
The yield components approach is based on the empirical observation that growth during a critical window of time around anthesis is related to the number of kernels per plant or per unit area (Fischer, 1985 and Kiniry et al., 2002). Using this relationship, the number of kernels generated for a given crop can be predicted based on simulated phenology and crop growth (Villalobos et al., 1996). Cultivar-dependent features are accommodated by using empirical coefficients that need to be estimated for each genotype. Disadvantages of this method are that yield components are difficult to simulate due to compensation among components, the use of several yield components augments the opportunities for errors during the simulation, and it requires labor-intensive calibration. 2.5.3 Biological yield: Muchow (1989) reported that in sorghum hybrids, high biomass both at maturity and during kernel filling stage had positively associated with kernel yield.
Subramanian et al. (1989) and Rao et al. (1998) found positive
correlation of panicle mass with kernel number per panicle and 1000 kernel weight. Many other authors [Dabholker et al. (1970), Sriram and Rao (1983) , Muchow (1989), Pinjari and Shinde (1995), Omanya et al. (1997), Pawar and Chetti (1997) and Rao
et al. (1998)] had also reported highly significant
positive correlations between biomass at maturity, panicle mass and kernel yield. There was a negative correlation between dry matter accumulation and relative moisture loss (Wenzel, 1999 and Singh et al., 1990). The dry matter production of both resistant and susceptible genotypes was directly proportional to the amount of light intercepted by the canopy and to the plant water loss divided by saturation deficit of the air (Terry, 1990). Genotypes with high osmotic adjustment had greater root length, soil water extraction capacity, and dry matter production during the pre-anthesis stress period and found no significant difference in dry matter yield at physiological maturity between low and high osmotic adjustment groups (Santamaria et al., 1990). 18
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Sorghum hybrids produced more biomass per day than varieties under stress conditions (Blum, 1991and Blum et al., 1992). Thus, in terms of plant water status and mean daily biomass production, cultivars were more drought resistant than hybrids. However, the physiological superiority of cultivars under drought stress did not result in higher kernel yield because of their relatively inherent poor harvest index. Donatelli et al. (1992) observed genotypic variation in biomass reduction under limiting water conditions. The dry matter of leaf, stem, and panicle at harvest decreased with drought stress, when imposed at all the developmental stages, except at physiological maturity (Gonzalez– Hernandez et al., 1992 and Rao et al., 1998). There was a positive correlation between dry matter production and kernel yield (Johsi and Jamadagni, 1990; Choudhary, 1992; Craufurd and Peacock, 1993; Sankarapandian et al., 1993 and Shinde et al., 1998). Lamani (1996) observed that the genotypes maintained higher dry matter in leaves, stem, and panicle during post anthesis period and decreased sharply during post anthesis period to developing kernels is important for higher productivity under receding soil moisture conditions. Dry matter production of many crops has been demonstrated to be related to transpiration (de Wit, 1958) and radiation interception (Monteith, 1977). These two relationships or some modification of them are used in most of the current crop growth models to predict dry matter yield. Tanner and Sinclair (1983) and Versteeg and van Keulen (1986) presented two different methods to estimate dry matter production for crops. Both indicated the difficulty in reliably estimating the kernel yield based on the dry matter yield.
19
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.5.4 Kernel yield: Kernel yield is the manifestation of various physiological and biochemical processes occurring in the plants in relation to external environmental factors. Prolonged water shortage affect virtually all metabolic processes and often result in severe reductions in plant productivity. Sorghum is said to be relatively drought tolerant crop, but at certain critical stages such as PI, boot and anthesis, moisture stress causes a reduction in growth and yield. Several researchers have reported that the reduction in kernel yield due to water stress was more severe when it occurs at reproductive and early kernel fill phases than during vegetative phase (Ravindra and Shivraj, 1983; GonzalezHernandez 1985; Garrity et al., 1984; Ludlow et al., 1990, Bakheit, 1989; Baldy et al., 1993 and Shankarpandian et al., 1993). Eick and Musick (1979) reported that reduction in sorghum kernel yield was mainly due to reduced kernel size when stress was initiated at heading or later stages.
Kulkarni et al. (1983) reported the relationship between
physiological parameters and kernel yield in spring season and found that genotypes with higher dry matter accumulation usually flowered early and matured early, and had higher number of primary and secondary panicle branches besides high yielding. Garrity et al. (1983) noticed that kernel weight and dry matter were more sensitive to water stress during kernel filling period when sorghum grown under temperate climatic conditions of Nebraska. Sriram and Rao (1983) observed that among the yield components, harvest index, panicle dry weight, and the number of kernel per panicle had showed significant positive association with higher kernel yield. Significant differences in kernel yield were observed among the cultivars of sorghum under rainfed conditions rather than the same cultivars under irrigation (Wright et al., 1983). Further, sorghum hybrids have shown less superiority in water retention capacity over their parents, but followed similar pattern to one of the parents (Gangadhararao and Sinha, 1988). Bapat and Gujar 20
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
(1990) also noticed higher yield on drought resistant line (Sel-3) among other genotypes in drought stress condition. Heinrich et al. (1985) suggested that high kernel weight genotypes used in the breeding program could result realized higher kernel yields. In general, the kernel weight component of kernel yield was influenced by water stress if stress occurs during kernel filling stage (Norem et al., 1985). Generally, under filed conditions, the kernel yield reduction due to moisture stress was mainly through both low kernel weight and kernel number per panicle (Parvatikar and Hiremath, 1985 and Rao and Shivraj, 1988). However, Verma and Eastin (1985) demonstrated that no decrease in kernel weight occured in water stress and the kernel yield reduction occurred due to reduction in kernel number. Sweeney and Moyer (2007) noticed that sorghum kernel yield was varied with year and, thus, responded to N fertilizer rates. Yield responses were found up to 120 lb of N per acre, but splitting N applications did not improve yield. Nitrogen removed in kernel responded linearly to increasing N fertilizer rates since N concentration appeared to dilute when yield increased under more favorable growing conditions. Takzure et al. (1998) stated that water stress at the heading or milk stage showed greater adverse effects than at the panicle initiation stage. Their results revealed that water stress decreased the number of kernels per panicle from 18.8 to 70%, kernel yield per plant from 13.7 to 59.4 % and 1000- kernel weight from 4.4 to 35.6%. Rao and Shivraj (1988) reported that all the glossy varieties showed a significant increase in kernel dry weight compared with the nonglossy varieties. Also, they concluded that water stress decreased the kernel yield from 54 to 73% in non-glossy varieties, while in glossy varieties; the corresponding values were 46 to 54%. Sandoval et al. (1989) observed the effect of drought at different panicle developmental stages on kernel yield and it was found that drought stress during microsporogenesis destroyed the whole panicle. 21
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Drought prior to microsporogenesis caused 25-55% reduction in kernels per
panicle
due
to
abortion
of
pinnacle
branch
primordia.
After
microsporogenesis, drought stress reduced individual kernel weight by less than 50%.
Thus, they concluded that drought stress at all stages of panicle
development reduced the yield. A similar study was conducted for this trial by Ludlow et al. (1990) and they reported that water stress prior to anthesis reduced the kernel yield more than post anthesis stage of same intensity. Mastroilli et al. (1992) denoted that water stress during boot leaf stage greatly decreased the final biomass and kernel yield, but stress applied later had no significant effect. Sorghum kernel yield is closely related to green LA (Borrell and Douglas, 1997) and leaf Pn (Locke and Hons, 1988 and Peng et al., 1991). Although C crops have higher photosynthetic N use efficiencies as compared with C crops, N supply and plant N status considerably affected sorghum leaf area index (Locke and Hons, 1988). The N fertilizer rate prescribed for a no-tillage system is often based upon the amount necessary for conventional tillage plus some arbitrary percentage. The percentage varies among states but ranges from about 10 to 20% (Phillips et al., 1980 and Buchholz and Hanson, 1982). According to Craufurd and Peacock (1993), kernel yield was affected by both timing and severity of stress and a largest reduction of 87% in kernel yield occurred when stress imposed from boot and flowering stages, however, kernel yield was not affected when the stress treatments were given during vegetative phase (GSI). Blum (1990) noticed a three (dryland) to four (irrigated) fold increase in the yield of improved cultivars obtained from ICRISAT gene bank mainly due to increase in harvest index by three to four folds rather than increase in total biomass. Thus, he concluded that drought susceptibility could be measured by estimating the reduction in yield from irrigated to dryland condition and reported that landraces showed the greatest variability for this trait than hybrids. 22
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Santamaria and Fukai (1990) stated that osmotic adjustment was an important adaptive mechanism under drought conditions and the cultivars with high osmotic adjustment produced higher kernel yield than those with low osmotic adjustment. Similarly, Ludlow et al (1990) noticed that the increase in yield was to the tune of 24 % in the cultivars having high osmotic adjustment. Khizzah and Miller (1992) found that kernel yield was positively correlated with plant height, harvest index and 1000- kernel weight and negatively with days to anthesis and green leaf retention.
Similarly, Chowdhari (1992) reported a
positive relationship of kernel yield per plant with growth rate of panicle and number of kernels per panicle, while it was negatively related to flowering. 2.5.5 Harvest Index (HI): Harvest index, the ratio of kernel yield to total plant mass, has been taken as a measure of success in partitioning assimilated photosynthate to harvestable product. In 1962, Donald suggested the term "harvest index" and recommended it as an important reference to assess progresses in germplasm development towards
improved
yield
potential.
The
implication
was
that
increased harvest index indicated a progress in partitioning crop photosynthate to the harvestable component. Harvest index did not become an important feature of crop assessment until after the publication of the review on harvest index by Donald and Hamblin in 1976 (Hay, 1995). A direct relationship between crop nitrogen accumulation perspective,
and harvest index is there
crop harvest indices
are
strong
may
have
presented. From indications occurred,
that and
such
an
previous that
historical
changes the
in
changes
in harvest index were closely associated with crop nitrogen fertility. Harvest index is one of the major yield components for higher kernel yield in crop improvement.
It is thus an important aspect of differential
partitioning of photosynthates, and improved harvest index represents an 23
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
increased physiological capacity of the crop to mobilize photosynthates and nutrients and translocate them to organs of economic value (Wallace et al., 1972). Donald (1962) defined the harvest index as the ratio of the kernel dry weight to the total above ground dry weight at maturity of the crop. Yoshida (1976) found that the range in the harvest index reported among crops in several studies was between 0.15 and 0.40, but in bread wheat, it ranged from 0.5 to 0.6 (Jain and Kulashreshta, 1976andYoshida, 1976). Though, the harvest index is a genotypic character, it is influenced by environmental factors occurring during ripening phase. In many crops, in the recent years, improvement in yield did not occur appreciably due to ceiling of HI. Willey and Basiime (1973) reported that tall and late maturing sorghum genotypes had recorded low HI and reduced assimilate partitioning to the panicles. Kulkarni et al. (1981) and Parvatikar and Hiremath (1985) reported a significant positive correlation between harvest index and kernel yield in spring sorghum.
Similarly, in sorghum hybrids,
harvest index has shown a significant positive association with kernel yield (Muchow, 1989).
Harvest index in high osmotic adjustment cultivars was
ranged from 0.38 to 0.40 under no stress, and 0.30 to 0.36 in stress conditions (Ludlow et al., 1989). Higher yield in sorghum cultivars was due to more and large kernels that are associated with higher harvest indices and distribution index (Ludlow et al., 1990). Wenzel et al. (1999) reported that the traits most severally affected by moisture stress were kernel mass, harvest index and biomass.
Maintenance of higher harvest index by means of channeling
assimilates to the developing ear was an important drought resistant mechanism in sorghum (Wenzel et al., 2000). Higher harvest index values were found in non-glossy than glossy cultivars under water stress (Rao, 1999). Kadam et al. (2002) concluded that the higher harvest index invariably leads to higher kernel yield.
24
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Snyder and Carlson (1984) reviewed partitioning for crop yield improvements. These reviews proposed many concepts related to the harvest index that included the following hypotheses: (i) HI is a conservative speciesrelated parameter, (ii) HI has been improved through breeding, and (iii) HI is directly related to photosynthetic partitioning into the economic yield components. The simulation of HI has basically followed two approaches. One approach is to increase the HI from a given time after anthesis until physiological maturity or a maximum preset HI is reached (Williams et al., 1989). Hammer and Muchow (1994) and Hammer and Broad (2003) concluded that despite its simplicity, this method has limited applicability because it is difficult to assign a correct value to the HI increase rate and to the timing of the HI plateau onset, the latter usually occurring after two-thirds of the time between anthesis and physiological maturity (Hammer and Muchow, 1994). 2.6 Physiological parameter 2.6.1 Water Use Efficiency (WUE): Water use efficiency (WUE), if defined as the biomass accumulation over water consumed, may be a highly inherited characteristics of a specific genotype. In practice, WUE can be enhanced by less irrigation, particularly via stomatal regulation. However, such enhancement is largely a trade-off between lower biomass production and higher WUE. We have presented a case here that we may enhance WUE through an improved harvest index. Harvest index has been shown as a variable factor in crop production, especially in cases where whole plant senescence of rice and wheat is unfavorably delayed. Such delayed senescence can delay the remobilization of pre-stored carbon reserves in the straws and results in lower harvest index. A controlled soil drying, the moderate drying such that overnight rehydration of plants is still possible, should enhance the whole plant senescence and therefore improve the remobilization of perstored carbon reserve. 25
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
The gains from the improved harvest may outweigh any possible loss due to shortened photosynthetic period in kernel filling, such as the case with high N nutrition, lodging-resistant cultivars that stay green for too long, and hybrid cultivars with too high heterosis. (www. hkbu.edu.hk/boil/Jzhang.htm). The watering with silicon allows a reduction in leaching, but does not affect evapotranspiration. Reduction in sorghum yield as a result of variable precipitation or inadequate irrigation is the major problem (CGIAR, 2007). Sorghum is the fifth most significant cereal crop harvested in metric tons worldwide (FAO, 2009). Sorghum is stress tolerance crop and its adjustment to secondary lands has been well recognized. Sorghum as an optional cereal crop for more adequate food production and food security in areas where moisture limitation and heat stress is a trouble for maize. The adaptability of sorghum under increasing temperature and decreasing precipitation may help to alleviate crop losses. Drought tolerance in crops may be enhanced by application of certain mineral elements like phosphorus (Alkaraki et al., 1996), potassium (Egilla et al., 2001) and calcium (Lux et al., 2003). Availability of water is one of the limiting factors determining plant distribution and survival in natural ecosystem. The crop, soil and water management could be improved by increasing root penetration and improving water use efficiency or photosynthetic capacity (Athar and Ashraf, 2005). Generally, water use efficiency in plants tends to be high as an adaptation under stress conditions. This adaptation remains effective until stress conditions are severe or prolonged (Saxena, 1985 and Umar & Moinuddin, 2002). Status of mineral nutrients in plants plays a critical role in increasing plant resistance to drought stress (Marschner, 1995). Of the mineral nutrients, potassium (K) is reported to be valuable in ameliorating the ill-effects of soil water stress for the survival of crop plants. Potassium nutrition to plants stimulates root growth and hence, efficient exploration of soil water (Saxena, 1985).
26
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Further, it decreases the loss of soil moisture by reducing the transpiration and increasing the retention of water in plants (Umar and Moinuddin, 2002). Keeping these facts in view, feasibility of K nutrition in augmenting the performance of the crops namely, mustard, sorghum and groundnut was tested under water stress conditions. Under water-deficit conditions, K nutrition increases crop tolerance to water stress by utilizing the soil moisture more efficiently than in K-deficient plants. The positive effects of K on water stress tolerance may be through promotion of root growth accompanied by a greater uptake of nutrients and water by plants (Rama Rao, 1986) and through the reduction of transpirational water loss (Beringer and Trolldenier, 1978). Also, K maintains the osmotic potential and turgor of the cells (Hsio, 1973 and Lindhauer, 1995) and regulates the stomatal functioning under water stress conditions (Umar et al., 1993; Nandwal, 1998 and Kant and Kafkafi, 2002), which is reflected in improved crop yield in drought conditions (Umar and Bansal, 1997 and Umar and Moinuddin, 2002). Besides, it takes part in many essential processes in plants (Marschner, 1995) and enhances photosynthetic rate, plant growth and yield under stress conditions (Egila et al., 2001; Sharma et al., 1996; Tiwari et al., 1998; Umar & Moinuddin, 2002). The protective role of K in plants suffering from drought stress has been attributed to the maintenance of a high pH in stroma and against the photo-oxidative damage to chloroplasts (Cakmak, 1997). According to (Al-Kaisi and Broner, 2009) definition of crop water use, also known as evapotranspiration (ET), is the water used by a crop for growth and cooling purposes. This water is extracted from the soil root zone by the root system, which represents transpiration and is no longer available as stored water in the soil. Consequently, the term "ET" is used interchangeably with crop water use. All these terms refer to the same process, ET, in which the plant extracts water from the soil for tissue building and cooling purposes, as well as soil evaporation. 27
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Crop water use (ET) is influenced by prevailing weather conditions, available water in the soil, crop species and growth stage. At full cover, a crop will have the maximum ET rate (reference ET) if soil water is not limited; namely, if the soil root zone is at field capacity. Full cover is a growth stage at which most of the soil is shaded by the crop canopy. In a more technical term, the crop is at full cover when the leaf area is three times the soil surface area under the canopy. At this growth stage, the crop canopy intercepts most of the incoming solar radiation, thereby reducing the amount of energy reaching the soil surface (Al-Kaisi and Broner, 2009). Different crops reach full cover at different growth stages and times after planting (Scheduling Irrigations: A Guide for Improved Irrigation Water Management Through Proper Timing and Amount of Water Application, USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Agricultural Research Service and Colorado State University Extension, 1991). In order to standardize ET measurements and calculations, a reference crop ET (ETr) is used to estimate actual ET for other Crops. In humid and semihumid areas where water usually is not a limiting factor, grass is used as an ET reference crop. In arid or semi-arid areas, alfalfa is more suitable as a reference ET crop because it has a deep root system, which reduces its susceptibility to water stress resulting from dry weather. Actual evapotranspiration (ETa) is the water use of a particular crop at a given time. ETa of an annual crop reaches its maximum at full cover, and can be higher or lower than ETr, depending on the crop. In Colorado, alfalfa is used as the reference crop. Corn at full cover has a maximum water use rate, ETa, of 93 percent of alfalfa ETr, while sugar beets have a maximum ETa rate of 103 percent of alfalfa ETr. (Al-Kaisi and Broner, 2009).
28
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.6.2 Estimating crop water use Actual crop water use, ETa, can be measured directly by using several research methods or indirectly by measuring changes in soil water content with time. However, these methods are expensive, tedious and can be done only in research settings. Therefore, ETr is theoretically and empirically correlated to weather parameters to generate ET models that estimate ETr from weather parameters. ET equations most often used in Colorado are the Penman and JensenHaise models. These models were checked and calibrated for local conditions and give reliable estimates of ETr. The Jensen-Haise equation uses temperature and solar radiation measurements, while the Penman equation uses temperature, solar radiation, wind and humidity. Actual evapotranspiration, ETa, can be calculated from ET reference by multiplying ETr by the crop coefficient (Kc). A crop coefficient is the ratio between ETa of a particular crop at a certain growth stage and ETr. If the crop coefficient is smaller than one, the crop uses less water than reference ET and vice versa. Crop coefficients depend on the stage of growth and usually are presented as a function of time following planting. Crop coefficients are measured using lysimeters for different crops. In years that are significantly different from the average year, actual crop development may exceed or lag behind the average crop development rate. Therefore, when using crop coefficients in an irrigation scheduling scheme, some adjustments of the average curve to actual crop development may be needed. The crop coefficient of an annual crop is small at the beginning of the growing season, gradually increases as the crop develops, and may decline as the crop matures.
29
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.6.3 Effect of soil water on ET: Crop water use also is influenced by the actual soil water content. As soil dries, it becomes more difficult for a plant to extract water from the soil. At field capacity (maximum plant-available water content), plants use water at the maximum rate. When the soil water content drops below field capacity, plants use less water. This phenomenon is described by the soil coefficient (Ks), which is a function of soil water content. The soil coefficient often is used in irrigation scheduling schemes to adjust the actual ET to reflect soil water conditions (AlKaisi and Broner, 2009). After rain or irrigation, actual ET is higher than when the soil or crop surface is dry. When the soil or crop surface is wet, the evaporation portion of ET increases significantly, resulting in a higher actual ET, especially early in the growing season. This actual ET rate can be larger than reference ET. This phenomenon is described in irrigation scheduling schemes as an additional evaporation coefficient (Kw). This coefficient adjusts actual ET (upward) to reflect wet soil surface conditions. Crop WUE is an important trait in breeding programs. In almost all crops, the greater WUE for kernel is not due to an improvement in biomass accumulation, but, rather surprisingly, it is due to almost entirely to an improved in HI (Richards et al., 1993). Thus, it is important to study the relationship between kernel yield, WUE and HI. 2.7 Chemical composition: Like other cereals, sorghum and millets are predominantly starchy. The protein content is nearly equal among these kernels and is comparable to that of wheat and maize .Pearl and little millet are higher in fat, while finger millet contains the lowest fat. Barnyard millet has the lowest carbohydrate content and energy value. One of the characteristic features of the kernel composition of millets is their high ash content. They are also relatively rich in iron and 30
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
phosphorus. Finger millet has the highest calcium content among all the food kernels. High fiber content and poor digestibility of nutrients are other characteristic features of sorghum and millet kernels, which severely influence their consumer acceptability. Generally the whole kernels are important sources of B-complex vitamins, which are mainly concentrated in the outer bran layers of the kernel. The sorghum bran is low in protein and ash and rich in fiber components. The germ fraction in sorghum is rich in ash, protein and oil but very poor in starch. Over 68 percent of the total mineral matter and 75 percent of the oil of the whole kernel is located in the germ fraction. Its contribution to the kernel protein is only 15 percent. Sorghum germ is also rich in B-complex vitamins. Endosperm, the largest part of the kernel, is relatively poor in mineral matter, ash and oil content. It is, however, a major contributor to the kernel's protein (80 percent), starch (94 percent) and B-complex vitamins (50 to 75 percent).
31
CHAPTER THREE MATERIALS AND METHODS This study conducted at two different locations; Bakrajo, the field of the Faculty of Agricultural sciences (35˚ 33΄ N; 45˚ 21΄ E; 750 masl) and Kanipanka location (35˚ 22΄ 37˝ N; 45˚ 43΄ 33˝ E; 545 masl) located 35 Km east of Sulaimani, during the summer season 2009, to investigate the growth performance and yield of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) which treated with three different irrigation treatments as regulated water deficit and two different fertilization treatments. The experiment was laid out according to Split Plot Design, with three replication, in which the regulated deficit irrigation treatments were distributed in the main plots which were arranged as Randomized Complete Block Design (RCBD) while the sub-plots involved the two fertilization levels. 3.1 Irrigation treatments: The irrigation treatments were implemented through irrigation scheduling which included irrigation cutting by approximately 20-30% from cumulative quantity of water applying which approximated to 14 irrigation time table in different stages through growth period as following: 1. I : Irrigation as plant needed with no cutting in any stages of the plant growth. 2. I : Included two consecutive cuttings of irrigation, one in vegetative growth stage and one in reproductive stage post flowering. 3. I : Included two consecutive cuttings of irrigation, in both vegetative and reproductive growth stages.
32
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.2 Fertilization levels: The fertilization treatments included two levels: 1. T0: No fertilization. 2. T1: Recommended fertilization. The origin of the kernel of Sorghum hybrid (KS310) was from Agricultural Research Center in Sulaimani, the seeds were sown on July 14th and July16th ,2009 at Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations respectively, the seed cultivation was arranged in rows with 70cm distance between every two rows in the plots and 25 cm between plants within rows. The land of the two experiments in the two locations were prepared by plowing and harrowing, as well as all cultural practices were conducted whenever needed. 3.3 Growth criteria: 3.3.1 Destructive samples were used for determining the dry matter accumulation, along with the growth season by putting the samples in the oven drier for 72 hours at 70 °C or to stable weight. Destructive samples were used for determining the leaf area expansion along with the growth season, using the following formula: Leaf Area = Max. Length * Max. Width * 0.747…… (Stickler et al., 1961) 3.3.2 Number of the leaves per plants (TLNO). 3.3.3 Leaf Area Ratio (LAR): Measured for determining the relationship between the leaf area expansion and dry weight increasing along with the growth season, using the following formula: LAR = Plant Leaf area / plant weight 1999)
33
cm2/g (Rajcan and Tollenaar,
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.3.4 Root-Shoot ratio: Measured for determining the sorghum growth response to the
water
deficit condition along with the different growth stages by using the following formula: (Root Weight / Shoot Weight) 3.3.5 Days to 50% flowering: Determined from seeding to 50% flowering. 3.3.6 Days from 50% flowering to PM: Determined from 50% flowering to 50% physiological maturity. 3.4 Reproductive criteria: 3.4.1 Number of kernels per plant. Determined at PM. 3.4.2 1000-kernel weight (g). Determined at post harvest. 3.4.3 Biological yield (Mg ha-¹). Determined at PM. 3.4.4 Kernel Yield (Mg ha-¹). Determined at PM. 3.4.5 Harvest Index (HI): determined by: HI = Kernel Yield (Mg ha-¹) / Biological Yield (Mg ha-¹). 3.5 Physiological criteria: 3.5.1 Water Use Efficiency (WUE): This includes., Crop Water Use Efficiency (WUEc), which calculated on the basis of accumulated biomass per accumulated evapotranspiration or a Actual evapotranspiration. Calculated by the following formula: WUEc = Total Biomass or Accumulated Dry Matter (g) / Crop Evapotranspiration (ETc).
34
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Actual evapotranspiration was estimated by the following formula: Etc = ETo * Kc … (Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1975) In which ETo: Reference evapotranspiration. Kc: is crop factor. Reference evapotranspiration (ETo): Estimated according to modified or FAO-Blaney-Criddle method (National Engineering Handbook-part 623, 1993) (Shaw, 1993), as following: ETo = Ce [ at + bt pT]…….( Shaw, 1993) Where: ETo = evapotranspiration for clipped grass reference crop (in/d). P = mean daily percent of annual day time hours. T= mean air temperature of the period. at and bt = adjustment factor based on the climate of the region. Ce = adjustment factor based on elevation above sea level. Values of at are presented in certain tables by (Shaw, 1993) as a function of relative humidity (RHmin) and the mean ratio of actual to possible sunshine hours (n/N), (Shaw, 1993). The value of bt depended on minimum relative humidity, sunshine ratio, and the mean day time wind speed. Adjustment factor bt can be computed as: Bt = bn + bu Values of bn and bu are summarized in certain tables (Shaw, 1993), respectively, along with the equations to use in calculating these factors (Shaw, 1993). 35
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The elevation correction factor: Ce = 0.01 + 3.049 * 10 -7 Elev Elev = elevation above sea level. The mean daily percent of annual daytime hours (P) is the ratio of the hours of daylight for a day in the middle of the respective month, relative to the hours of daylight for the year. Values of (p) are listed in tables (Shaw, 1993) as a function of latitude. The mean daily percent of annual daytime hours (p) can be computed from: P= 0.00304 COS-1[-SIN (θd) SIN (Lat.)/ COS (θd) COS (Lat.)] Where: θd = SIN-1{0.39795COS[0.98563(DOY-173)]} Where: θd= Solar declination angle (degrees) DOY= day of year Lat. = Latitude (N˚). 3.6 Chemical Components: 3.6.1 Starch content%: Measured by using spectrophometer at wave length of 490 nanometer according to (Joslyn, 1970). 3.6.2: Protein content%: was measured by Kjeldahl method-wet digestion with (H2SO4 and H2O2). (Saffarzadeh etal., 1999; Zou etal. 2007). 3.6.3 Ash content %...…….( AOAC, 2000; Zou etal. 2007) 3.6.4 Fiber content %....….( Van Soest, 1967)
36
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Statistical Analysis: The data were statistically analyzed according to the method of analysis of variance as general test. Combined analysis of variance across locations was conducted as shown in the tables.
37
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Table (1): Meteorological data of Bakrajo during 2009 season (Agrometeorological Department- Sulaimani), Bakrajo (Lat. 35⁰ 33’N; Long. 45⁰ 21’ E; 750 masl.).
Months
Air tem. (C°)
Rel.Humid (%)
Precipitation (mm/month)
Sunshine duration (hr.)
Wind speed (m/s)
Pan evap. (mm)
Soil tem. ( C° )
Cloud cover (oktas)
January
6.8
59.7
39.5
6.2
1.3
4.8
4.6
3.2
February
9.9
65.6
67.2
4.6
0.8
2.2
8.9
4.8
March
12.0
60.6
87.1
4.4
1.7
2.5
11.4
5.0
April
16.0
53.4
97.6
6.3
1.4
3.5
16.4
4.4
May
23.9
35.7
2.9
7.3
1.2
5.7
22.5
3.0
June
29.9
24.8
2.6
8.4
2.0
9.7
27.7
1.6
July
32.4
24.2
0.0
9.5
1.3
9.6
30.3
0.1
August
31.6
25.1
0.0
10.3
1.4
8.6
31.0
0.0
September
26.2
34.3
10.1
9.0
1.2
5.4
27.1
1.1
October
22.5
38.6
72.9
7.6
0.9
4.2
20.4
2.1
November
13.2
68.3
136.4
5.2
0.7
2.4
12.6
3.5
December
9.8
73.6
98.3
3.3
0.5
1.3
8.6
5.0
38
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Table (2): Meteorological data of Kanipanka during 2009 season (Agrometeorological Department- Sulaimani), Kanipanka (Lat. 35⁰ 22’N; Long. 45⁰ 43’E; 545 masl.).
Months
Air tem. (C°)
Rel.Humid (%)
Precipitation (mm/month)
Sunshine Duration (hr.)
Wind speed (m/s)
Pan evap. (mm)
Soil tem. ( C° )
Cloud cover (oktas)
January
6.8
51.3
27.7
6.3
1.70
1.5
7.8
2.8
February
10.0
58.3
94.3
5.8
1.90
1.9
10.8
4.1
March
11.5
55.6
98.3
4.4
2.20
2.7
12
4.7
April
15.9
50.2
99.5
6.6
2.20
3.8
14.6
3.9
May
25.4
31.4
1.8
7.9
2.30
8.5
23.8
3.4
June
31.0
25.2
6.3
8.4
2.40
11.5
31.6
2.9
July
33.2
23.3
0.0
8.7
2.40
12.6
35.8
2.3
August
34.2
22.2
0.0
10.7
2.30
12.3
35.7
0.4
September
28.5
28.4
5.7
9.2
2.10
8.9
31.5
1.7
October
23.7
30.3
80.2
7.8
1.80
5.7
25.4
2.3
November
13.1
58.8
145.6
5.5
1.50
1.8
15.2
3.4
December
9.7
62.4
97.1
4.1
1.50
1.0
11.4
4.0
39
CHAPTER THREE
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Table (3): Some physical and chemical properties of soil in both locations.
Soluble cations and anions
Soil Properties
Bakrajo Location
Kanipanka Location
P.S.D.
Silty Clay
Silty Clay
Sand (g/kg)
48.5
37.2
Silt ( g/kg)
449.8
506.7
Clay ( g/kg)
501.7
456.9
PH
7.44
7.60
EC (dS m-1)
0.33
0.26
Total N (mg Kg-1)
19.93
27.66
CaCO3 (%)
33.76
34.26
Calcium (Ca+2) (Meq.l-1)
2.66
2.98
Magnesium (Mg+2) (Meq.1-1)
1.98
2.22
Potassium (K+)(mg L-1)
2.67
2.14
Sodium (Na+) ( mg L-1)
27.66
19.93
Carbonate (CO3=) (Meq.l-1)
0.00
0.00
Bicarbonate (HCO3=) (Meq.1-1)
8.09
2.33
Chloride (Cl-1) (Meq.1-1)
2.76
1.39
P-available( Mg-1)
4.26
5.70
40
CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the studied characters: 4.1.1 Vegetative growth characters: Table (4), shows the effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the vegetative growth characters of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations where the number of green leaves per plant in Bakrajo was between11.166 to11.666, although there was no significant effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the total leaf number per plant, but the minimum number of leaves rewarded from to I2, while maximum number was 11.666 due to the full irrigated treatment I1. In compare to Bakrajo, there was increase in the number of leaves per plant in Kanipanka which was between 12 to 12.833, while maximum number of leaves (12.833 leaves plant-1) was due to I2 and the minimum number (12 leaves plant1
) was recorded under the effect of I3 . There was decreasing in number of leaves
per plant according to water deficit increasing as implemented as regulated water deficit from I1 to I2 and I3, and variation in the number of leaves per plant in Kanipanka due to Bakrajo may related to the differences in the temperature and other environmental factors, these results are agreement with similar researches conducted by (Quinby et al., 1973, Verma et al., 1983, Hou et al., 1987). The same table showed non-significant differences in the value of leaf area index in both locations, but there was decreasing of LAI value from 3.172 to 2.976 under the effect of RDI from I1 to I3 in Bakrajo, reducing of leaf area value may resulted from reducing in the leaf number per plant due the effect of RDI, the results are similar to those by (Verma et al., 1983, Hou et al., 1987). There is obvious indication to the growth period in table (4), in which there were no significant differences of the RDI impact on the stages from seeding to 50 % flowering and from 50%flowering to physiological maturity at Bakrajo location, but there were decreasing in the number of days of the previous stages at 41
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Kanipanka location according to RDI from I to I , but there were significant differences due to number of the days from seeding to 50% flowering and from 50% flowering to physiological maturity, in which maximum number of days was due to I which was 51.833days, while I recorded minimum number of days which was 50.833days, where it showed a significant difference between I and I by one day, in which maximum number of days was to I (58.833days), while minimum number of days was due to I which was (57.833days). Differences among treatments to the RDI showed the importance of water availability which effect as direct factor on plant growth and development, although plants exhibit a range of biological, physiological and morphological adaptation in their response to water stress, especially sorghum which is more sensitive to water stress during flowering (Seetharama, 1986 and Robents, 1998). Table (4): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the vegetative growth characters of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo Days from
Total Treatment
leaf
LAI
number
seeding to 50% flowering
I I I LSD.
11.666 11.166 11.5 n.s
3.172 2.801 2.976 n.s
I I I LSD. ₅
12.166 12.833 12.000 n.s
4.876 4.751 5.075 n.s
55 54.5 54.333 n.s Kanipanka 51.833 51.5 50.833 0.755
42
Days from
Days from
50%flowering
seeding to
to PM
PM
59.5 59.5 59.333 n.s
114.5 114 113.666 n.s
58.833 58.5 57.833 0.755
110 110 108.666 n.s
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.2 Effect of fertilization treatments on the studied characters: 4.2.1 Vegetative growth characters: Table (5), indicates the effect of fertilization on vegetative growth characters in both locations, where there were no significant effect of fertilization on the number of leaves and leaf area index in Bakrajo, while there were significant differences of its impact due to the growth stages of the period from seeding to 50% flowering and from 50%flowering to physiological maturity and from seeding to physiological maturity, in which there were reducing in the number of days of growth stages from T to T , which may be interpreted by differences in the sorghum response to differences in environmental factors such as fertility, fertilization deficit caused delay in flowering via significant increasing of the number of days required from seeding to 50% flowering from 53.777 days to 55.444 days , number of days required for physiological maturity was increased significantly, by delaying it from 58.666 days to 60.222 days, these results were similar to those by (Alam et al., 2001 and Kadam et al., 2002). In Kanipanka location , there was significant decrease in the number of leaves under the effect of fertilization from 12.666 leaves to 12.000 leaves, but there was no significant difference in LAI between no fertilization and fertilized treatments , but as resulted in Bakrajo , there was also delaying in flowering in Kanipanka, by increasing number of days required to 50% flowering from 50.666 days to 52.111 days and the kernel filling period increased from 57.666 days for fertilized treatments to 59.111 days for non fertilized treatments, that may interpreted as the response of sorghum to the effect of water deficit and fertilization deficits which directly impacted the phenology of sorghum and the growth stage periods, these results agree with those by (Verma et al.,1983; Norem et al.,1985; Mathews et al., 1990b; Craufurd and Peacock,1993; Kamoshita et al., 1996;Shivalli, 2000 and Kadam et al., 2002) . 43
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (5): Effect of fertilization treatments on the vegetative growth characters of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo Days from Total leaf Treatment
number
LAI
seeding to 50% flowering
T T LSD.
11.666 11.222 n.s
2.918 3.048 n.s
55.444 53.777 1.245
Days from
Days from
50%flowering
seeding to
to PM
PM
60.222 58.666 1.12
115.666 112.444 2.354
59.111 57.666 1.087
110.555 108.555 n.s
Kanipanka T T LSD.
12.666 12.000 0.47
4.896 4.905 n.s
52.111 50.666 1.087
4.3 The interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the vegetative growth characters of sorghum in Bkarajo and Kanipanka: Table (6), shows the effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the vegetative growth characters of sorghum in Bkarajo and Kanipanka. In Bakrajo, although there were no significant differences, but the maximum number of leaves per plant was recorded under the effect of I T interaction which was 12.000 leaves, while the minimum value was recorded under I T which was 11 leaves, indicating the obvious effect of water deficit, but in case of LAI, the maximum record was due to I T which was 3.49, and the minimum value of LAI was 2.461due to I T . The effect of the interaction of the two treatments on the growth period was due to I T , and I T , and I T , which also showed the fertility effect on the increasing of the number of days required to flowering and the period of the kernel filling, which was 60.666 days for the treatment I T . 44
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
The results of the interaction of the two treatments were the same in Kanipanka for total number of leaves per plant which was13 leaves to I T and exceeded others significantly except I T which was 13 leaves. The maximum LAI was recorded under the effect of the I T which was 5.146, while I T exceeded others in the growth periods from seeding to 50% flowering, from 50%flowering to physiological maturity, and from seeding to physiological maturity which were 52.666days, 59.666 days, and 112.333days, respectively. Similar results were recorded by others (Hermus et al., 1982; Verma et al., 1983; Hou et al., 1987; Anonymous, 1988; Deepak et al., 1995; Gower et al., 1999; Kussner and Mosandl, 2000; Alam et al., 2001 and Kadam et al., 2002). In general the combination treatments were not affected significance on the mentioned characters; this may be due to the positive effect of nitrogen on the studied parameters and the negative effect of irrigation treatments on the values of the mentioned parameters, finally the interaction between them may created the condition from plant growth which not affects significantly on vegetative growth characters.
45
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (6): Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the vegetative growth characters of sorghum in Bkarajo and Kanipanka. Bakrajo Days from
Total Irrigation
Fertilization
leaf
seeding to
LAI
50%
number
I I I
I I LSD.₀₅
50%flowering to PM
Days from seeding to PM
T T T T T T
12.000 11.333 11.333 11.000 11.666 11.333 n.s
3.328 55.666 3.016 54.333 2.964 55.666 2.638 53.333 2.461 55 3.49 53.666 n.s n.s Kanipanka
60 59 60.666 58.333 60 58.666 n.s
115.666 113.333 116.333 111.666 115 112.333 n.s
T T T T T T
13.000 11.333 12.666 13.000 12.333 11.666 0.815
4.829 4.923 4.713 4.788 5.146 5.004 n.s
59.333 58.333 59.666 57.333 58.333 57.333 n.s
109.666 110.333 112.333 107.666 109.666 107.666 n.s
LSD.₀₅
I
flowering
Days from
52.333 51.333 52.666 50.333 51.333 50.333 n.s
4.4 Total leaf number per plant: 4.4.1 Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the total leaf number per plant: Figures (1and 2) reveal the effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the total leaf number per plant the number of leaves per plant was increased, under the effect of RDI from 26 and 27 of August to Sept. 26, followed by a period of stability which had continued to physiological maturity in both locations, while the number of leaves in Bakrajo ranged from 6.333 to 11.666, there was greater number in Kanipanka which was ranged between 6.16 to 13.166, indicating the 46
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
more favorable environment in Kanipanka in compared to Bakrajo, which affected positively through the Growing Degree Day and the phyllocron. The stability of the leaves number started after flowering stage in both locations, that which routinely takes place cereal species.
Total Leaf Number / plant
14 12 10 8 I
6
I
4
I
2 0 26-Aug
05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
Growth Stage Figure (1): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the total leaf number per plant in Bakrajo.
Total Leaf number / plant
14 12 10 8 I
6
I I
4 2 0 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct
26-Oct
Growth Stage Figure (2): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the total leaf number per plant in Kanipanka. 47
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.4.2 Effect of fertilization treatments on the total leaf number per plant: Table (7), shows the effect of fertilization treatments on the total leaf number per plant non-significant effect of fertilization treatments on the total leaf number in both locations, with few exceptions, at the start of the growth period, there was decreasing in the number of leaves under the effect of fertilization, and the final number of leaves in Kanipanka, may had been compensated by the leaf expansion in the case of fertilization treatment, these results were agreed with those of (Choudhari, 1977). Table (7): Effect of fertilization treatments on the total leaf number of sorghum in both locations Bakrajo Treatment
26-Aug
05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
T T LSD. ₅
6.888 5.888 0.607
7.444 7.333 n.s
9.111 11 8.888 11.222 n.s n.s Kanipanka
11 11.222 n.s
11.333 11.222 n.s
11.666 11.222 n.s
Treatment
27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct
26-Oct
T T LSD. ₅
6.333 6.333 n.s
7.333 7 n.s
9.555 9 0.47
12.222 12.333 n.s
12.777 12.666 n.s
12.555 12.888 n.s
12.666 12 0.47
4.5 Leaf Area Index: Tables (8) and figures (3 and 4) show the effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area index along with the growth stages in both locations. Figure(3) indicates increasing in the values of the LAI from Aug. to Oct. with differences in the expansion rates in Bakrajo, the value were ranged between 0.982 in 26 Aug. and 3.172 in 15 Oct. and it was greater during the period pre flowering compared to the period of the post flowering, where reproductive growth had started. 48
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
However Figure (4) shows the greater effect of RDI on the expansion rate of LAI in Kanipanka compared to Bakrajo, where the value ranged between (1.703–5.075), the differences between the two expansion rates in the two locations, under similar water deficit treatments (I1, I2, and I3) may be interpreted by the differences in the environmental conditions of the two locations. The later may cause an increase in the negative direct or indirect effects of the treatments on the growth stages and growth periods in particular pre flowering period where clear reduction was occurred in the LAI value. These results were in agreement with those of (Santos et al., 1979; Eastin, 1983; Myers et al., 1986 and Rao et al., 1998). Table (8): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area index of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Treatment
26-Aug
05-Sep
Bakrajo 15-Sep
I
1.177
1.417
1.844
2.832
2.906
3.172
I
0.982
1.511
2.153
2.524
2.804
2.801
I
1
1.206
1.967
2.077
3.079
2.976
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
Kanipanka 06-Sep 16-Sep 26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
Treatment
27-Aug
I
1.95
2.332
3.11
4.492
4.616
4.876
I
1.703
1.986
3.118
4.103
4.035
4.751
I
1.672
2.291
3.138
4.092
4.3
5.075
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
49
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
3.5
Leaf Area Index
3 2.5 2 I
1.5
I I
1 0.5 0 26-Aug
05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
Growth Stage Figure (3): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area index of sorghum along with the growth stage in Bakrajo. 6
Leaf Area Index
5 4 I
3
I I
2 1 0 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct
Growth Stage Figure (4): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area index of sorghum along with the growth stage in Kanipanka.
50
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (9) reveals the effect of fertilization treatments on LAI of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka non significant effect the fertilization treatments T0 and T1 had on the leaf area index in both locations from Aug. to Oct, while the opportunity of greater value of leaf expansion were recorded in Kanipanka location compared to Bakrajo, this may be due to more favorable condition in Kanipanka location during the vegetative growth period.
Table (9): Effect of fertilization treatments on LAI of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Bakrajo
Treatment
26-Aug
5-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
5-Oct
15-Oct
T
1.06
1.278
2.173
2.389
3.046
2.918
T
1.046
1.478
1.803
2.567
2.814
3.048
LSD.₀₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
Kanipanka Treatment
27-Aug
6-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep
6-Oct
16-Oct
T
1.606
2.336
3.191
4.202
4.572
4.896
T
1.944
2.07
3.053
4.256
4.062
4.905
LSD.₀₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
51
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (10) refers to non-significant interaction effect of RDI and fertilization treatments at both locations, while the values of LAI at Kanipanka location were higher the values at Bakrajo this may be due to the reasons mentioned before. Table (10): Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the leaf area index of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Bakrajo Irrigation
Fertilization
26-Aug
05Sep
15Sep
25-Sep
05Oct
15Oct
T T T T T T
1.184 1.171 0.985 0.978 1.012 0.989
1.263 1.571 1.393 1.629 1.176 1.236
1.896 1.793 2.811 1.496 1.812 2.122
2.86 2.805 2.209 2.839 2.098 2.056
3.187 2.626 2.846 2.762 3.105 3.053
3.328 3.016 2.964 2.638 2.461 3.49
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
I I I LSD.₀₅
Kanipanka Irrigation
Fertilization
27-Aug
06Sep
16Sep
26Sep
06-Oct
16Oct
T T T T T T
1.826 2.075 1.734 1.672 1.257 2.087
2.465 2.198 2.364 1.609 2.18 2.402
3.451 2.77 2.905 3.33 3.216 3.061
4.618 4.365 4.123 4.083 3.865 4.319
4.877 4.355 4.243 3.828 4.597 4.002
4.829 4.923 4.713 4.788 5.146 5.004
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
I I I LSD.₀₅
52
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.6 Dry Matter Accumulation: 4.6.1 Effect of RDI and fertilization treatments on dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka: Table (11), indicates the rate of dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower, and root of sorghum in Bakrajo under RDI treatments, from Aug. 26 to Oct.25. Although there was a reduction in leaf dry weight and total dry matter results from the effect of water deficit which might be attributed to reduced LA and leaf abscission leading to a decrease in accumulate biomass, (Muchow and Coates,1986), but the RDI technique may regulate that effect as well as sorghum response to water deficit condition. As shown in table (11), there were an increasing in the dry matter accumulation which partitioned to sorghum leaves under the effect of I , I , and I and the maximum accumulation was at Oct. 5 with no significant differences among three treatments, except at Oct.25, in which there was significant differences between each of (I , I ) and (I ), indicating the better response of sorghum to RDI as I treatment. There were no significant differences in dry matter accumulation, under the three treatments of RDI, which partitioned to stem along the growth period, but there were differences in increasing in the rate of dry matter accumulation, while I caused continuous increase in DM accumulation from Aug.26 to Oct.25, and maximum value was at Oct.25 which was 36.034g, but the maximum record under the effect of I and I were at Oct.5 which were (35.686g and 43.473g) respectively. This followed by a reduction in the rate of DM accumulation in the next part of Oct. that may interpreted by reduction in leaf area liveliness and vitality of leaves which naturally decreased near to physiological maturity and impact their photosynthesis efficiency of them as well as the reserved materials of the green parts, these results agreement with those of (Wenzel, 1999 and Singh et al., 1990). 53
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (11), reveals the maximum dry matter which partitioned to flowers at the end of growth stage at Oct.25 with significant differences among three treatments, referring to maximum record to I (64.822g) which exceeded I (44.188g), and I (39.807g). The partitioning of accumulation of dry matter to sorghum roots under the RDI treatments I and I effect were increasing along with the growth stages and maximum value recorded by I (32.583) was at Oct.25 which was reduction in DM portioned to roots under I treatments at the end of the growth period, and there were significant differences among them with recording the highest value from I in comparing with I and I , The declines in both stem weight and sugar content were due to remobilization of stem dry matter to the panicle. Wilson et al., (1980) reported that dry matter accumulation rate of the sorghum plants was greatly reduced by the water deficit resulted from reduction LAI and decreased substrate production rate per unit leaf area photosynthesis.
54
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (11): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root of sorghum in Bakrajo (g). Bakrajo Leaf
I I I
16.2 13.44 15.06
45.32 40.474 40.856
42.05 35.793 50.114 37.064 55.909 40.922
41.537 59.339 63.652
39.645 39.99 42.194
25Oct 36.58 27.631 35.815
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s n.s Stem
n.s
n.s
3.296
05-Sep
15-Sep 25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
20.146 17.984 17.181 n.s
23.012 25.379 22.384 27.335 19.447 30.879 n.s n.s Flower
27.272 35.686 43.473 n.s
31.487 27.807 37.91 n.s
05-Sep
15-Sep 25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
13.538 12.805 11.808 n.s
16.722 18.73 18.884 18.841 21.121 14.106 n.s n.s Root
23.003 22.529 28.031 n.s
37.465 27.908 36.418 n.s
05-Sep
15-Sep 25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
23.795 22.085 22.665 n.s
20.105 21.336 24.312 20.384 19.819 19.118 n.s n.s
24.442 23.527 25.87 n.s
29.236 24.345 26.57 n.s
Treatment 26-Aug
Treatment 26-Aug I I I LSD. ₅
3.473 3.756 4.461 n.s
Treatment 26-Aug I I I LSD. ₅ Treatment 26-Aug I I I LSD. ₅
6.955 5.298 5.686 n.s
05-Sep
15-Sep 25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
55
25Oct 36.034 29.657 26.809 n.s 25Oct 64.822 44.188 39.807 19.102 25Oct 32.583 25.646 19.917 8.397
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (12) indicates the effect of fertilization treatments on dry matter accumulation and it’s partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root in Bakrajo, there were increasing in the rate of dry matter accumulation which partitioned to leaves from Aug.26 to Oct.5, which maximum record of dry matter that accumulated, but T and T were affected non significantly. Increasing of dry matter along the period from Aug.26 to Oct.5 may reflecting an increase in LAI through to Oct.5 because of an increase in leaf number per plants which started to decline with the end of vegetative growth (Wilson et al., 1980). There was no significant effect of the two fertilization treatments on the dry matter that accumulated and partitioned to stem along the growth period except that at Oct.25 in which T exceeded T significantly and accumulated 35.565g in compare to I which recorded only 26.102g. Differences in the period may occur due to photosynthetic efficiency which lacking in green leaves happened and other factors related to storage and remobilization of reserves (Constable and Hearn, 1978). There were increasing in the DM which partitioned to flowers from Sept.with non significant effect of T and T till Oct.25 which differed significantly by exceeding the effect of T (54.402g) on T (44.809g), that may interpreted by the responsibility of the DM accumulation at that period which is for higher part of sorghum such as higher leaves that stayed green and flowering, and supporting role of I , these results agreed with those of (Fischer and Wilson, 1971 and Rao and Singh, 1978). Table (12) also showed DM accumulation under the effect of fertilization treatments that partitioned to roots, there were significant effect of fertilization treatment at Sept.25 in which T exceeded T by accumulating 23.515g to 17.077g respectively, that may explain the shifting in root growth occurred, but at Oct.25 there were also significant differences between T and T too with superiority to T against T by recording 28.085g to 24.013g respectively.
56
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (12):Effect of fertilization treatments on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root of sorghum in Bakrajo (g). Bakrajo Leaf Treatment 26-Aug 05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
T
14.067
38.676
52.007
33.158
57.278
38.739
32.079
T
15.737
45.757
46.708
42.695
52.407
42.48
34.605
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
Stem Treatment 26-Aug 05-Sep T
4.151
17.144
31.954
25.187
37.559
30.667
26.102
T
3.643
19.73
30.057
30.543
33.699
34.135
35.565
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
3.8
Flower Treatment 26-Aug 05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
T
14.222
22.161
16.514
30.206
31.297
44.809
T
11.212
15.657
17.937
18.836
36.563
54.402
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
2.852
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
Root Treatment 26-Aug 05-Sep T
5.487
23.453
20.977
17.044
26.101
24.909
24.013
T
6.45
22.244
21.847
23.515
23.125
28.525
28.085
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
5.187
n.s
n.s
2.86
57
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (13) shows the effect of regulated deficit irrigation on dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and roots in Kanipanka. There were similar results due to dry matter increasing under the effect of RDI treatments from Aug. 27 to Sept.26 in which maximum DM was recorded with higher rate compared to that accumulated in Bakrajo during the same period, the declining which occurred post Sept.26 may be interpreted by LAI declining due to the senescence of lower leaves, there were significant differences of the effect of RDI at the end of growth period at Oct.26,in which I1 and I2 exceeded I3 , showing the positive effect of I2 which not significantly differed from I1 with full irrigation. Although there was reduction in dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to stem and root in the later days of kernel filling period, but there were increasing in stem dry matter accumulation along with the growth period from 27Aug , and there was significant differences between the effect of I with I and I which non significantly differed, there was similar result due to root growth but in case of flower development the significant differences were between I and I and I as other side, results agree with (Garrity 1984;Muchow, 1989 and Rajcan and Tollenaar, 1999).
58
et al.,
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (13):Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root of sorghum in Kanipanka (g). Kanipanka Leaf Treatment 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
I
32.24
38.514
60.648
71.803 68.408 62.102 59.511
I
26.71
49.675
49.941
66.182 62.666 63.521
I
34.9
56.998
60.419
73.623 69.858 71.143 40.132
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
53.21
14.366
Stem Treatment 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
I
7.663
23.744
46.354
68.077 51.779 52.788 57.306
I
7.131
25.135
33.855
52.616 65.634 50.938 39.587
I
5.221
30.497
49.165
65.07
86.52
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
51.067 34.117 n.s
16.528
Flower Treatment 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
I
14.365
20.749
40.97
I
14.985
22.849
66.343 59.038 68.743 76.464
I
17.51
39.275
53.908 73.245 90.216
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
40.038 63.366 84.795
24.225
n.s
57.65 19.61
Root Treatment 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
I
12.766
21.465
28.481
43.665 37.765 37.808 51.759
I
8.716
22.21
22.939
41.444 32.892 36.479
I
9.476
21.605
26.29
41.127 34.467 41.352 36.354
LSD. ₅
3.099
n.s
n.s 59
n.s
n.s
n.s
36.04
13.038
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (14) shows the effect of fertilization treatments on dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root in Kanipanka, indicating the significant differences between the effect of T and T on the DM partitioning of leaves in the vegetative period pre-flowering, in which T (59.45 g) exceeded T (54.555 g) at Sep.16, and also in the stage of post flowering at Oct.26 by 53.775 g to T against 48.127g to T , that may related to the effect of fertilization
on
the
longevity
of
leaves
and
the
photosynthetic
efficiency,(Constable and Hearn, 1978 and Rajcan and Tollenaar, 1999). Table (14), indicates to reduction in DM accumulation which partitioned to stem post Oct.06, after continuous increase from the beginning of the growth period, that agrees with (Rao and Singh, 1978) who observed that stem weight of sorghum increased up to first week after anthesis and then fell to the level much lower than that at anthesis and thereafter was declined. The stem weight decline may be due to remobilization of stem dry matter to the panicle, or there was greater effect of RDI than that of fertilization, (Wilson et al., 1980). The effect of fertilization treatments on the root DM accumulation was significantly differed, the effect of T was superior to T from the beginning of the growth period until Oct.06 this the end of vegetative growth where kernel filling period stage was initiated, that may be related either to growth physiology of sorghum or to shifting in the root growth under the effect of T and T , with superiority to T (Wenzel, 1999 and Singh et al., 1990).
60
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (14): Effect of fertilization treatments on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root of sorghum in Kanipanka (g). Kanipanka Leaf Treatment
27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep 26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
T
29.1
47.672
54.555 66.057 67.223 64.497 48.127
T
33.466
49.154
59.45
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
4.296
75.014 66.731 67.013 53.775 n.s
n.s
n.s
3.348
Stem Treatment
27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep 26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
T
5.876
26.155
41.191 54.569 73.617 52.765 40.074
T
7.588
26.762
45.078 69.273 62.338
LSD. ₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
50.43
47.266
n.s
3.332
Flower Treatment
27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep 26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
T
13.618
27.562 55.427 61.216 74.813 68.864
T
17.621
27.686 52.053 53.664 74.071 77.076
LSD. ₅
3.029
n.s
n.s
6.998
n.s
7.067
Root Treatment
27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep 26-Sep 06-Oct 16-Oct 26-Oct
T
8.222
19.077
23.64
T
12.111
24.442
28.166 47.586 34.748 38.788 42.414
LSD. ₅
n.s
2.03
3.42
61
36.571 35.334 38.305 40.355
5.099
n.s
n.s
n.s
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.7 Leaf Area Ratio: Table (15) reveals the effect of RDI on the leaf area ratio in both locations, which was not significant along with the growth period in Bakrajo except the stage of pre- physiological maturity, leaf area is the basis of growth and yield and it depends on the area, rate of expansion, and size of leaves and their senescence ,
DM accumulation closely related to the photosynthetic
assimilation from leaves, so the period of declining of LAI is synchronized with reduction in crop growth rate and partitioning of assimilate rate, but there were significant differences of the effect of RDI, where the effect of I exceeded the effects both I and I with value 45.127cm2 g-1, 35.881cm2 g-1, and 32.879cm2 g-1 respectively. Table (15) also shows the effect of RDI on LAR in Kanipanka, indicating the significant differences at flowering and post flowering stages, in which there were superiority I over I and I , maximum LAR values recorded were 35.137 cm2 g-1, and 41.924 cm2 g-1 for both stages respectively , there were greater value of LAR along the growth period in Kanipanka at 06.Sep and 16.Sep in compare to that recorded in Bakrajo, that may be related to the more favorable conditions for both leaf expansion and DM accumulation, these results were agreed with the results of (Lafarge and Hammer, 2002).
62
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (15): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area ratio in Bakrajo and Kanipanka.
Treatment
26-Aug
Bakrajo 05-Sep 15-Sep
I
84.925
27.614
I I LSD. ₅
81.701 74.16 n.s
30.713 26.29 n.s
Treatment I I I LSD. ₅
27-Aug 72.561 69.321 64.319 n.s
32.105
30.716 27.218 n.s Kanipanka 06-Sep 16-Sep 46.869 37.357 32.124 41.87 31.872 32.272 n.s n.s
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
53.079
45.127
43.152
43.49 35.841 n.s
35.881 32.879 8.813
42.319 35.121 n.s
26-Sep 35.107 31.685 31.977 1.962
06-Oct 41.924 30.861 26.945 5.828
16-Oct 39.179 37.058 34.092 n.s
Table (16) reveals non significant effect of fertilization treatments on LAR in both locations. Although the all differences were not significant but there were different response to T and T in Bakrajo, but in Kanipanka there were continuous increasing of LAR value with obvious exceeding of T till flowering according to leaf expansion, and there was declining after flowering stage with LAI declining. Table (16): Effect of fertilization treatments on leaf area ratio of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka.
Treatment T T LSD. ₅
26-Aug 82.799 77.724 n.s
Treatment T T LSD. ₅
27-Aug 68.367 69.1 n.s
Bakrajo 05-Sep 15-Sep 26.682 30.971 29.73 29.005 n.s n.s Kanipanka 06-Sep 16-Sep 39.63 38.655 34.28 35.677 n.s n.s 63
25-Sep 46.632 41.641 n.s
05-Oct 36.397 39.539 n.s
15-Oct 41.415 38.98 n.s
26-Sep 32.619 32.227 n.s
06-Oct 32.833 33.653 n.s
16-Oct 35.361 38.192 n.s
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.8 Root: Shoot ratio: Tables (17) reveals the effect of irrigation treatments on sorghum root – shoot ratio in both locations, there were no significant differences in Bakrajo due the root-shoot ratio among RDI treatments from the beginning of growth period to PM, except the stages around flowering in which there were significant differences among RDI, and there was exceeding of I over I and I was recorded, but in Kanipanka in addition to flowering stage, there were significant differences of the effect of RDI in the beginning of the growth period and the superiority was to I due to other water deficit treatments I and I , although sorghum has the ability to extract water from deeper soil layers, the plant physiological condition at flowering stage , showing more metabolic activities than vegetative stage, may need shifting in root and shoot growth which directly or indirectly may affect root-shoot ratio(Farre and Faci, 2004 and Chaoet al., 2005). Table (17): Effect of irrigation treatments on the root-shoot ratio of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo Treatment I I I LSD. ₅ Treatment I I I LSD. ₅
26Aug 0.351 0.301 0.295 n.s 27Aug 0.309 0.254 0.225 0.046
05-Sep 15-Sep 25-Sep 05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
0.307 0.311 0.317 n.s
0.267 0.202 0.191 0.059
0.27 0.254 0.227 0.023
0.237 0.259 0.194 n.s
06-Sep 16-Sep 26-Sep 06-Oct
16-Oct
26-Oct
0.301 0.247 0.206 0.053
0.21 0.198 0.193 n.s
0.277 0.215 0.251 0.043
0.289 0.263 0.296 0.243 0.175 0.22 n.s n.s Kanipanka
0.228 0.216 0.184 n.s
64
0.24 0.219 0.212 n.s
0.237 0.175 0.15 0.044
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (18) shows the effect of fertilization treatments on the root-shoot ratio in both locations, where there were greater ratio for root-shoot ratio in case of using fertilization in compared to the situation with no fertilization, nutrients affected directly or indirectly on the rate of leaf area expansion and also total leaf numbers, which closely related to shoot growth, but phenological symptoms may do not appear due to sorghum adaptation ability to tolerate stress condition such as nutrient deficit unless in flowering stage in which T exceeded T , or higher nutrient applications, these results were agreed with those of (Zhao, 2005) who explained that both the 20% N and the 0% N-treated plants had significantly smaller LA and less DM accumulation than the control plants. There was no significant effect of interaction between irrigation and the fertilization treatments in most growth stages that may be related to the complementary effect of the two treatments, in which the higher data recorded for interaction between the two treatments of I T . Table (18): Effect of fertilization treatments on the root: shoot ratio of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo Treatment
26Aug
05-Sep 15-Sep 25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct 25-Oct
T
0.299
0.333
0.26
0.225
0.214
0.248
0.237
T
0.333
0.291
0.247
0.259
0.226
0.252
0.222
LSD. ₅
0.03
n.s
n.s
0.026
n.s
n.s
n.s
Kanipanka Treatment
27Aug
06-Sep 16-Sep 26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct 26-Oct
T
0.242
0.224
0.2
0.206
0.177
0.198
0.258
T
0.283
0.279
0.218
0.242
0.197
0.203
0.237
LSD. ₅
0.038
0.031
0.017
0.035
0.016
n.s
n.s
65
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.9 Reproductive growth characters: Table (19) indicates the effect of RDI on the reproductive growth characters of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. In Bakrajo, there were significant differences due the effect of RDI on reproductive characters such as biological yield, number of kernel per plant and kernel yield, in which I exceeded I and I significantly by recording 2223.666 kernel plant-1, 11.835 Mg ha-1, and 4.842 Mg ha-1, respectively, reflecting the effect of full irrigation which caused greater biomass, but there was reduction in biomass accumulating under the effect of RDI(I and I ), but the differences between I and I were not significant, showing similar response of the sorghum hybrid to I and I . There were no significant effects of RDI on the harvest index in both locations, but both treatment I and I gave greater values for HI compare to I , which may interpreted by reduction in kernel yield per plant as HI closely is be related to kernel weight per plant due to the effect of assimilation partitioning, these results were agreed with those of (Wilson et al., 1980; Joshi and Jamadagni, 1990 and Rajcan and Tollenaar, 1999). Significant differences
were recorded for the effect of RDI on the
reproductive growth characters in Kanipanka, except for HI, I showed superiority on both I and I with values of 38.606 g, 1492.5 kernel per plant, 15.932 Mg ha-1 , and 4.069 Mg ha-1 to 1000 kernel weight, number of kernel per plant, biological yield and kernel yield respectively. Similarly as in Bakrajo, there were no significant differences between I and I treatments in all studied growth characters, with no significant differences of the effect of RDI on HI, these results were similar to those of (Wenzel et al., 1999 and Wenzel et al., 2000).
66
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (19): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the reproductive growth characters of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka.
I I I LSD. ₅
Wt 1000 Kernel (g) 31.646 29.173 28.42 n.s
I I I LSD. ₅
38.606 31.58 28.065 6.299
Treatment
Bakrajo Biological No. of yield Mg Kernel per plant ha⁻¹ 2223.666 11.835 1327.5 9.145 1132.833 9.159 608.77 1.267 Kanipanka 1492.5 15.932 950.166 14.058 934.666 12.08 245.876 3.155
Kernel yield Mg ha⁻¹
HI
4.842 2.752 2.191 1.299
0.19 0.221 0.216 n.s
4.069 2.11 1.842 0.927
0.171 0.158 0.162 n.s
Table (20) indicates the effect of fertilization treatments on reproductive growth characters in both locations. There were significant differences between the effect of the two fertilization treatments T and T , on the all studied characters except HI, in which superiority was due to the effect of I in 1000kernel weight, number of kernels per plant, biological yield and kernel yield, by recording 31.502g, 1804 kernel plant-1 , 10.924 Mg ha-1, and 3.891 Mg ha-1 ,respectively. Similar results for the effect of fertilization treatments were obtained in Kanipanka, in which significant differences between the two fertilization levels were recorded with superiority to I in all reproductive characters, except HI such as 1000- kernel weight, number of kernel per plant, biological yield and kernel yield, recording 36.008g, 1177.222 kernel plant -1, 14.988 Mg ha-1, and 3.083 Mg ha-1.
Kernel yield and other reproductive
characters were closely related to the vegetative growth period, which fertilization played a great role resulting in the expansion of leaf area which directly affected yield through efficient photosynthesis and producing more assimilation rate that affected CGR and storage remobilization, these were 67
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
results agreed with those of (Lin and Yeh, 1990, Jamadagni; 1990; Blum, 1991; Blum et al., 1992; Gower et al., 1999 and Kussner and Mosandl, 2000). Length of period post flowering or longer kernel filling period affected kernel mass through increasing filling ability process, as Muchow (1989) reported that in sorghum hybrids, high biomass both at maturity and during kernel filling stage was positively associated with kernel yield . Subramanian et al. (1989) and Rao et al. (1998) found positive correlation of panicle mass with kernel number per panicle and 1000-kernel weight. Many researchers reported the presence of highly significant positive correlations between biomass at maturity, panicle mass and kernel yield. (Dabholker et al.,1970; Sriram and Rao , 1983; Muchow ,1989; Pinjari and Shinde ;1995; Omanya et al.,1997; Pawar and Chetti,1997 and Rao et al.,1998). Table (20): Effect of fertilization treatments on the reproductive growth characters of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Bakrajo Biological No. of yield Mg kernel per plant ha⁻¹ 1318.666 9.168
kernel yield Mg ha⁻¹ 2.632
0.213
Treatment
Wt 1000 kernel (g)
T
27.991
T
31.502
1804
10.924
3.891
0.205
LSD. ₅
3.479
395.187
0.689
0.459
n.s
HI
Kanipanka T
29.492
1074.333
13.058
2.265
0.158
T LSD. ₅
36.008 2.156
1177.222 39.284
14.988 0.334
3.083 0.157
0.169 n.s
68
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (21) shows the effect of interaction between RDI and fertilization treatments on the reproductive growth characters at both locations. There were significant differences of the effect of interaction between the two treatments in Bakrajo on 1000- kernel weight, in which I T exceeded the other treatments, while in the case of biological yield, the superiority was given by I T , however the differences between the effects of two treatments on other characters did not reach significant levels. Where as in Kanipanka, there were significant differences between the effect of the two treatments on all studied reproductive characters such as 1000- kernel weight, number of kernel plant-1, biological yield, kernel yield and harvest Index, in which I T was superiority recording 43.613g, 1585.333 kernel plant-1, 17.08 Mg ha-1, 4.849 Mg ha-1, and 0.182, respectively. The positive effect of interaction between the two treatments (I T ) in Kanipanka may be related to the plant requirements for water and fertilization supply due to the environmental condition in that location (Santamaria et al., 1990 and Donatelli et al., 1992).
69
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (21): Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the reproductive growth characters of sorghum in Bkarajo and Kanipanka. Bakrajo
Irrigation Fertilization
Wt 1000 Kernel (g)
Biological Kernel No. of yield Kernel per yield Mg plant ha⁻¹ Mg ha⁻¹
HI
T
32.48
1763
10.525
3.99
0.216
T
30.813
2684.333
13.144
5.694
0.164
T
23.106
1225
7.729
2.006
0.21
T
35.24
1430
10.561
3.499
0.233
T
28.386
986
9.25
1.901
0.213
T
28.453
1297.666
9.068
2.481
0.219
6.027
n.s
1.194
n.s
n.s
I
I
I LSD.₀₅
Kanipanka T
33.6
1399.666
14.787
3.29
0.161
T
43.613
1585.333
17.08
4.849
0.182
T
30.56
898.666
12.963
1.926
0.165
T
32.6
1001.666
15.154
2.294
0.15
T
24.316
924.666
11.429
1.58
0.149
T
31.813
944.666
12.731
2.105
0.175
3.735
68.042
0.578
0.272
0.021
I
I
I LSD.₀₅
70
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.10 Water Use Efficiency and Crop Evapotranspiration: The goal of any irrigation scheduling scheme is to keep the water content in the root zone above the allowable depletion level. This ensures that the crop will not suffer from water stress and will produce maximum potential yield (AlKaisi and Broner, 2009). Table (22) and Figures (5,6,7 and 8), indicate to the rate of dry matter accumulation, crop water efficiency and crop evapotraspiration under the RDI effect in both locations through three months of growth period. There were increasing in dry matter accumulation from Aug. to Oct., while there were decreasing in crop evapotranspiration in the same period which may be explained by decreasing in daily temperature especially in Sept. and Oct., that directly affected the water requirement and finally the units of water which used for biomass synthesizing, causing increase in water use efficiency for I ,I and I from Aug to Oct.,in Bakrajo location the later increase in WUE occurred with noticeable differences due to the effect of RDI treatments. There were general increase in the efficiency of water use for I , I and I from Aug. to Oct, with differences in their effects, maximum value of WUE was recorded in Bakrajo for I in Oct. which was 1.430, while the minimum value was 0.117 for I in Aug.
There were similar increasing in dry matter accumulation in Kanipanka
for the same period, while there were decreasing in the water units used by the sorghum plants or crop evapotranspiration, and there were increasing in WUE for the same period, maximum value for WUE due to the effect of RDI treatments I , I and I were in Oct. and they were under the effect of I (2.404g mm-1).
71
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (22): Crop water use efficiency of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo Dry Matter (g)
ETC (mm)
WUE (g/mm)
Treatment Aug. 19.673 17.203 19.523
I I I
Sept. 79.903 83.242 85.985
Oct. 111.827 100.363 85.984
Aug. Sept. Oct. Aug. Sept. Oct. 126.282 236.579 87.62 0.156 0.338 1.276 147.327 225.604 87.62 0.117 0.369 1.145 147.327 228.944 60.111 0.133 0.376 1.430
Kanipanka Dry Matter (g)
ETC (mm)
WUE (g/mm)
Treatment Aug. Sept. Oct. Aug. Sept. Oct. Aug. Sept. Oct. 39.903 180.850 160.666 175.984 233.629 78.777 0.227 0.774 2.040 34.023 185.142 189.363 179.655 209.460 78.777 0.189 0.884 2.404 40.121 192.602 197.849 179.655 209.459 82.528 0.223 0.920 2.397
I I I
Water Use Effiviency g/mm
1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8
I1
0.6
I2 I3
0.4 0.2 0 Aug
Sep
Oct
Growth Stage Figure (5): Water Use Efficiency of sorghum determined under the effect of I , I and I in Bakrajo.
72
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Water Use Efficiency g/mm
3 2.5 2
1.5
I1 I2
1
I3
0.5
0 Aug
Sep
Oct
Growth Stage Figure (6): Water Use Efficiency of sorghum determined under the effect of
Crop Evapotranspiration (mm)
I , I and I in Kanipanka.
250
200
150
I1 I2
100
I3
50
0 Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Growth Stage Figure (7): Crop Evapotranspiration of sorghum determined under the effect of I1, I2 and I3 in Bakrajo.
73
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Crop Evapotranspiration (mm)
250
200
150 I I
100
I
50
0 Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Growth Stage Figure (8): Crop Evapotranspiration of sorghum determined under the effect of I1, I2 and I3 in Kanipanka. Differences in the biomass accumulation at both locations were due to the environmental factors of the two locations which indirectly affected the net assimilation rate through the photosynthesis and respiration rates. Larger biomass was accumulated in Kanipanka compared to Bakrajo, and there were greater WUE values for I , I and I with values of (2.040, 2.404, and 2.397), respectively in Kanipanka compare to values of (1.276, 1.145, and 1.430) in Bakrajo respectively. The greater use of water by sorghum crop in both locations was in Sept. compared to Aug. and Oct; this may be related to the plant flowering in that growth stage where physiological activities were increased followed by increase in water requirement, because of the close relations between water requirements and the physiological activities (Opik and Rolfe, 2005).
74
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Differences, due to sorghum response parameter at both locations were noticed between the studied characters, while the greater WUE was recorded under the effect of I in Bakrajo, but in Kanipanka the greatest value of WUE was given by I , as well as the highest value of ETc at Bakrajo was shown by I in Sept., and the minimum value was due to I in Oct. However, in Kanipanka, the maximum value of ETc was recorded in Sept.by I , but in Oct., there were no great differences between I and I , consequently showing the effectiveness of the RDI in the two locations. Relationships found between crop evapotranspiration and water use efficiency may be resulted from the plant phenological response to 20 - 30% loss due to cumulative quantity of water which applied to the plants under the effect of
I and I treatments. Thus so relative sorghum transpiration was
reduced due to decreasing in plant leaf area because of reduction in the plant leaf number and leaf extension, which indirectly affected the plant transpiration rate, with differences according to plant growth stages, these results was agreed with those of (Yadav et al., 1999 and Richards et al., 2002). 4.11 Chemical composition: 4.11:1 Effect of RDI and fertilization treatments and their interaction on the chemical composition of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka: Tables (23, 24, and 25) reveal the determined chemical composition of kernels sorghum which was harvested in both locations, although chemical composition gives sorghum its edible value and availability for food and feed synthesizing, and the results showed non- significant differences for the effect of RDI and fertilization treatments, it indicated the relative decreases in the chemical components under the effect of RDI, I and I , and relative increases due to the effect of fertilization treatment T in protein content, fiber, total starch, soluble starch and insoluble starch in both locations, most of these data 75
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
agreed with previous studies and standard data of (Jaynes et al., 2001 and Sweeny and Moyer, 2007). Table (23): Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the chemical composition of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo Ash %
Protein %
I I I LSD.
2.606 2.996 2.663 n.s
16.32 14.96 16.81 n.s
I I I LSD.
2.496 2.498 3.386 0.753
Treatment
Fiber %
8.083 7.083 7.583 n.s Kanipanka 15.74 8.166 16.03 7.916 14.96 7.666 n.s n.s
Starch Sol. %
Starch insol. %
0.796 0.652 0.618 n.s
15.213 19.973 14.66 n.s
Starch Sol. + Stach Insol.% 16.009 20.625 15.278 n.s
0.932 0.793 0.7 n.s
15.006 13.98 12.013 n.s
15.938 14.773 12.713 n.s
Table (24): Effect of fertilization treatments on the chemical composition of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo Treatment Ash%
Protein %
T T LSD.
2.662 2.848 n.s
15.93 16.13 n.s
T T LSD.
2.924 2.663 n.s
15.16 16 n.s
Fiber %
Starch Sol.%
Starch insol.%
Starch Sol. + Starch Insol.%
7.111 0.747 8.055 0.63 n.s n.s Kanipanka 8 0.765 7.833 0.851 n.s n.s
17.684 15.546 n.s
18.431 16.177 n.s
13.275 14.057 n.s
14.04 14.909 n.s
76
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (25): Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the chemical composition of sorghum in Bkarajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo
Irrigation
Starch Sol. + Stach Insol.%
Fertilization
Ash%
Protein %
Fiber %
Starch Sol.%
Starch insol. %
T
2.773
15.74
8.166
0.7
15.653
16.354
T
2.44
16.91
8
0.891
14.773
15.664
T
2.553
13.99
7.333
0.8
20.426
21.227
T
3.44
15.94
6.833
0.503
19.52
20.023
T
2.66
18.08
5.833
0.74
16.973
17.713
T
2.666
15.55
9.333
0.496
12.346
12.843
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
I
I
I LSD.₀₅
Kanipanka T
2.11
14.58
8.333
0.95
15.426
16.376
T
2.883
16.91
8.000
0.914
14.586
15.5
T
2.88
14.58
7.166
0.715
13.106
13.821
T
2.11
17.49
8.666
0.871
14.853
15.724
T
3.77
16.32
8.5
0.63
11.293
11.924
T
2.996
13.61
6.833
0.77
12.733
13.503
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
I
I
I LSD.₀₅
77
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.12 Effect of locations on the studied characters: 4.12.1 Effect of locations on vegetative growth characters: Table (26) shows the effect of location on vegetative growth characters of sorghum that there were significant differences of studied vegetative growth characters between the two locations, where Kanipanka exceeded Bakrajo in total leaf number per plants and LAI, and recorded less number of days required from seeding to 50% flowering, from 50% flowering to PM, and from seeding to PM, that may related to differences in environmental factors between the two locations such as temperature which indirectly effect the plant water requirements and
crop evapotranspiration, in which Kanipanka, had more
favorite conditions than Bakrajo, especially in the later stage of growth period (tables 1 and 2),these results were agreed with those (Saxena, 1985; Marschner, 1995;Umar and Moinuddin, 2002 and Athar and Ashraf, 2005). Table (26): Effect of location on vegetative growth characters of Sorghum. Days from Days from seeding to 50%flowering 50% to PM flowering
Location
Total leaf number
LAI
Bakrajo
11.444
2.983
54.611
59.444
114.055
Kanipanka
12.333
4.9
51.388
58.388
109.555
0.975
1.441
0.635
0.872
0.987
LSD .
78
Days from seeding to PM
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (27) shows the effect of location on total leaf number per plant in sorghum significant differences were found in the number of leaves per plants along with the growth period, there was superiority for Kanipanka on Bakrajo, this may be related to longer growth period of Kanipanka, especially in the vegetative period that directly affected the differences in LAI at both locations, these results were similar to those of (Anonymous, 1988; Rao et al., 2004 and Anon., 2004). Table (27): Effect of location on total leaf number per plant in Sorghum. Location
26/27 Aug
5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
15/16 Oct
25/26 Oct
Bakrajo
6.388
7.388
9
11.111
11.111
11.388
11.444
Kanipanka
6.333
7.166
9.277
12.277
12.722
12.722
12.333
n.s
n.s
n.s
0.950
0.987
1.326
n.s
LSD .
NB: The 1st and 2nd dates (Tables 27 to 31) represent the Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations respectively. 4.12.2 Effect of locations on the LAI: Table (28) shows the effect of location on leaf area index in sorghum differences in the length of growth period in case of differences in environmental factors between the two locations resulted difference response of sorghum hybrid in the TLNO which directly affected the rate of leaf area expansion in the two locations across the growth period, in which Kanipanka exceeded Bakrajo significantly from the beginning of the growth period to the end of vegetative growth as shown in table (28) , this is similar to the result of (Locke and Hons, 1988; Peng et al., 1991; Borrell and Douglas, 1997).
79
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (28): Effect of location on leaf area index.
Location
26/27 Aug
5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
15/16 Oct
Bakrajo
1.053
1.378
1.988
2.478
2.930
2.983
Kanipanka
1.775
2.203
3.122
4.229
4.317
4.900
LSD .₀₅
0.589
0.350
n.s
0.635
0.764
n.s
4.12.3 Effect of locations on the dry matter accumulations: Table (29) shows the effect of Location on the dry matter accumulations that there were significant differences between the effect of the two locations on the rate of dry matter accumulations and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower, and root along with the growth period. There was obvious effect of the length of growth period in Kanipanka as well as effect of favorite environmental factors in that location which gave superiority to Bakrajo significantly in most of stages along with the growth period, this may be due to greater crop growth rate, and balance of partitioning of shoot assimilate between leaf, stem and other parts of plant (Eastin, 1983; Myers et al., 1986; Rao et al., 1998; Lin and Yeh, 1990 and Lafarge and Hammer, 2002).
80
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (29): Effect of Location on the dry matter accumulations. Leaf Location
26/27 Aug
5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
15/16 Oct
25/26 Oct
Bakrajo
14.902
42.217
49.357
37.927
54.843
40.609 33.342
Kanipanka
31.283
48.396
57.003
70.536
66.977
65.755 50.951
LSD .₀₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
20.490
n.s
10.662
8.094
15/16 Oct
25/26 Oct
Stem Location
26/27 Aug
5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
Bakrajo
3.897
18.437
31.005
27.865
35.629
32.401 30.833
Kanipanka
6.732
26.458
43.134
61.921
67.978
51.598 43.670
LSD .₀₅
n.s
5.318
n.s
22.799
20.954
14.972
5.597
15/16 Oct
25/26 Oct
Flower 5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
Bakrajo
12.717
18.909
17.226
24.521
33.930 49.606
Kanipanka
15.62
27.624
53.740
57.440
74.442 72.970
LSD .₀₅
n.s
n.s
19.252
15.071
17.834
5.633
15/16 Oct
25/26 Oct
Location
26/27 Aug
Root Location
26/27 Aug
5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
Bakrajo
5.968
22.848
21.412
20.279
24.613
26.717 26.049
Kanipanka
10.32
21.76
25.903
42.078
35.041
38.546 41.384
LSD .₀₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
13.991
8.819
81
n.s
6.156
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.12.4 Effect of locations on leaf area ratio: Table (30) shows the effect of location on leaf area ratio that there were significant differences were found between the two locations in LAR around the end of vegetative growth period and switching to reproductive growth or flowering, in which exceeding of Bakrajo location was superiority to Kanipanka, this may be related to lower means of shoot dry matter accumulation in Bakrajo than Kanipanka, which explain better partitioning to reproductive parts in later period of growth (Choudhari, 1992; Patel et al., 1994; Mahalakshmi and Bidinger, 2002 and Lafarge and Hammer,2002). Table (30): Effect of location on leaf area ratio.
Location
26/27 Aug
5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
15/16 Oct
Bakrajo
80.262
28.206
30.013
44.137
37.968
40.197
Kanipanka
68.734
36.955
37.166
32.423
33.243
36.776
LSD .₀₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
8.310
n.s
n.s
4.12.5 Effect of locations on root: shoot ratio: Table (31) shows the effect of location on root: shoot ratio in sorghum that there were significant differences between the two locations in the root and shoot ratio, in the beginning and near the end of growth stage, in which the superiority was to Bakrjo location. This later results may be due to a growth shifting resulted from the effect of stress condition, which positively affected the reproductive growth because of more water and nutrients were assimilated to the shoot parts especially the reproductive parts (Constable and Hearn, 1978; Garrity et al.,1983 and Hiremath and Parvatikar,1985).
82
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
Table (31): Effect of location on root: shoot ratio. Location
26/27 Aug
5/6 Sep
15/16 Sep
25/26 Sep
5/6 Oct
15/16 Oct
25/26 Oct
Bakrajo
0.316
0.312
0.253
0.242
0.220
0.250
0.243
Kanipanka
0.263
0.251
0.209
0.224
0.187
0.200
0.219
LSD .₀₅
0.074
n.s
n.s
n.s
0.028
0.045
n.s
4.12.6 Effect of locations on reproductive growth characters: Table (32) shows the effect of location on reproductive growth characters that there were significant differences between the two locations in reproductive growth characters; number of kernel per plant, biological yield, and harvest index, in which superiority was noticed in Kanipanka in biological yield, (14.023 Mg ha-1,to 10.046 Mg ha-
exceeded Bakrajo with values of 1
,respectively), while Bakrajo exceeded Kanipanka in number of kernel per
plant(1561.333 to 1125.777), and harvest index with values of (0.209 to 0.164). However, the differences between the two locations were not significant in the other studied characters such as weight of 1000-kernel and kernel yield, These results showed better partitioning of assimilates Bakrajo location due to its environmental factors which caused shifting in root: shoot ratio, that provided more assimilate in the later stage of growth which synchronized with kernel filling(Mathews et al., 1990b;Ludlow et al., 1990; Rajcan and Tollenaar, 1999;Jaynes et al., 2001and Kadam et al., 2002). Table (32): Effect of location on reproductive growth characters: Location
Wt 1000 Kernel (g)
Bakrajo Kanipanka
29.746 32.750
No. of Kernel per plant 1561.333 1125.777
LSD .₀₅
n.s
226.899
83
Biological yield Mg ha⁻¹ 10.046 14.023
Kernel yield Mg ha⁻¹ 3.262 2.674
0.209 0.164
1.672
n.s
0.061
HI
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSION
4.12.7 Effect of location on the chemical composition of sorghum kernel: Table (33) shows the effect of location on the chemical composition of sorghum kernel that there were non-significant differences between the effect of the two locations on the chemical composition of sorghum kernel, but there were higher percentage of protein, starch (insoluble), and total starch contents in Bakrajo than that of Kanipanka but relatively higher values were recorded in Kanipanka in starch (soluble), Ash% and Fiber%. These later small differences may be attributed to differences in sorghum hybrid response to environmental factors of the two locations (Sweeny and Moyer, 2007). Table (33): Effect of location on the chemical composition of sorghum kernel.
Starch (Sol)%
Starch (Insol) %
Starch (Sol + Insol)%
Location
Ash%
Protein Fiber % %
Bakrajo
2.755
16.037
7.583
0.688
16.615
17.304
Kanipanka
2.793
15.583
7.916
0.808
13.666
14.475
LSD .₀₅
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
84
CONCLUSIONS
1. The positive responses of Sorghum yield to nitrogen application and irrigation treatments. 2. RDI system that regulates nearly 20-30% water deficit was found to be an appropriate system for efficient water use and efficient crop evapotranspiration by sorghum plants. 3. The best treatments combination which gave the highest grain yield at both locations was I2T1 or I3 T1. 4. In combination with environmental factors, there were differences of sorghum phenology recorded under the same stress conditions, such as differences in length of growth period, LA expansion rate, and reproductive characters. 5. Shifting occurred in the rate of growth of plant parts, expressed as root: shoot ratio may indirectly affect reproductive growth, especially in the later stages. 6. Partitioning of assimilations may directly affect yield and harvest index, while biological yield was affected by total dry matter accumulation.
85
RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Sorghum can be cultivated as an alternative to food, and feed crop in plains with natural stress conditions such as low seasonal rain and low fertile soil. 2. Implementation of agricultural managements concerning water deficit and fertilization levels, in order to minimize their negative effects. 3. Conducting more investigations in future, using RDI and fertilization treatments with higher levels than those used in this study. 4. Conducting of more studies on the response of sorghum to RDI and other types of fertilizers, such as potassium. 5. Studying the effects of treatments used in the present study on the phenology of other crops.
86
REFERENCES
Ahloowalia .B.S, Meluzynski M, Nichterlein K (2004). Global impact of mutation-derived varieties. Euphytica 135: 187-204. Alam, S. Asghar, Ali, Qamar, I. A, Arshad, M. and Salim Shekh,(2001), Correlation of economically important traits in sorghum bicolor varieties, Online Journal Biological Science 1(5):330-331. Al-kaisi and I.Broner. (2009). Crop water use and Growth stages. Cited from Colorado State University, Extension, and no.4.715. Alkaraki G.N, Clark. R.B, Sullivan. C.Y, (1996). Phosphorus nutrition and water stress effects on proline accumulation in sorghum and bean. J. Plant Physiol., 148: 745-751. Almodares A, Sharif .M.E (2007). Effects of irrigation water qualities on biomass and sugar contents of sugar beet and sweet sorghum cultivars. J. Environ. BioI. 28(2): 213-218. Anderson, R.O. (1978).New approaches to recreational fishery management. Pages 73-78 in G.D.Noviger and J.G.Dillard, editors.New approaches to the management of small impoundments. American Fisheries Society North Central Division, Special Publication 5, Bethesda, Maryland. Anonymous (1988) Study of initiation, growth and development of leaves in relation to growth and yield of sorghum. In: Annual Report, AICRP on sorghum improvement, Dharwad, 1982-83.
87
REFERENCES
Anonymous (2004) Agricultural Statics at a Glance-2004. Department of Agricultural and Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, India, pp: 52. Anten, N.P.R., Schieving, E, Medina, E., Werger, M.J.A, Schuffelen, P., (1995). Optimal leaf area indices in C3 and C4 monoand dicotyledonous species at low and high nitrogen availability. Physiol. Plant. 95, 541-550. AOAC; Association of official methods of analysis.17 th Edition. AOAC Intern.,
Suite
500,481
North
Fredrik
Arenue.
Gaithersburge,
Maryland.20877-2417 USA. Arya, R.L., K.P. Niranjan and A. Singh, (1997). Effect of nitrogen and phosphorous on the productivity of kernel sorghum (sorghum bicolor) dolichos (Dolichos) intecropping system. Indian J. Agron., 42: 401-404. Athar, H., and M. Ashraf. (2005). Photosynthesis under drought stress. In: Hand Book Photosynthesis, 2nd (ed.) by M. Pessarakli. C. R. C. Press, New York, USA, Pp. 795-810. Aung, L.H. (1974). Root-shoot relationships. Pages 29-61. In: The Plant Root and Its Environment, E.W. Carson, ed. Univ. Press Virginia, Charlottesville, VA. Awari, V.R., Gadakh, S. R., Shinde, M. S. and Kusalkar, D. V., (2003), Correlation study of morpho-physiological and yield contributing characters with kernel yield in sorghum. Annals of Plant Physiology 17(1):50-52. Bakheit, B. R., (1989), Variability and correlation in kernel sorghum genotypes (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) under drought conditions at different stages of growth. Asian Journal of Agricultural Science, Egypt, 20(4):227-237. 88
REFERENCES
Baldy C, Konate, J. M., Olufayo, Ruelle, O. and Fernandes, A. (1993), Drought resistance of kernel sorghum in mediterian climate and optimum management of a limited water supply. Science et changement planetuires sourceSecheressess, 4(2):85-93. Bapat, D. R. and Gujar, A. R., (1990), Effect of soil moisture stress on the yield and yield attributes of different sorghum genotypes. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities, 15(2):185-188. Beadle, C. L., (1993). Growth analysis. In D. O. Hall et al. (eds.), Photosynthesis and Production in a Changing Environment: a Field and Laboratory Manual. Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 36-46. Beringer, H. and G. Trolldenier. (1978). Influence of K nutrition on the response to environmental stresses. In: Potassium Research - Reviews and Trends". International Potash Institute, Basel, Switzerland, pp. 189-222. Bishonoi, L. K., (1983), Canopy development, light interception, leaf photosynthesis and respiration in maize. Ph. D Thesis, Haryana Agricultural University, Hissar, Haryana, India. Blum, A, Mayer J, Sinmena, B. and Oblina, T., (1992), Comparative productivity and drought response of semi-tropical hybrids and open pollinated varieties of sorghum. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 118(1):29-36. Blum, A., (1970), Effect of plant density and growth duration on sorghum yield under limited water supply. Agronomy Journal, 62:333-336. Blum, A., (1990), Productivity and drought resistance of genetically improved cultivars as compared with native landless of sorghum. Sorghum Newsletter, 32:41. 89
REFERENCES
Blum, A., (1991), the comparative productivity and drought response of semitropical hybrids and open pollinated varieties of sorghum. Sorghum Newsletter, 32:55. Blum, A., Arjin, G. F. and Jordan, W. R., (1997), Sorghum root morphogenesis and growth I effect of maturity genes. Crop Science, 17: 149-153. Blum, A. (1997). The effect of dwarfing genes on sorghum kernel filling from remobilized stem reserves, under stress. Field Crops Res. 52:43–54. Bolstad, P.V., Gower, S. T., (1990). Estimation of leaf area index in fourteen southern Wisconsin forest stands using a portable radiometer. Tree Physiol., 7: 115-124. Borrás, L. (2004). Seed dry weight response to source-sink manipulations in wheat, maize and soybean: A quantitative reappraisal.
Field Crops
Res. 86:131–146. Borrell, A.K., Douglas, A.C.L., (1997). Maintaining green leaf area in kernel sorghum increases nitrogen uptake under post-anthesis drought. lnt. Sorghum Millets Newslett. 38, 89-92. Buchholz, D.D. and Hanson, RG. (1982). Soil fertility considerations in conservation tillage systems. Conservation Tillage Seminars Proceedings. College of Agriculture, University of Missouri-Columbia. pp. 99-103. Cakmak, 1. (1997). Role of potassium in protecting higher plants against photooxidative damage. CGIAR (2007). CGIAR Database. Chen, J. M., Black, T. A., (1992). Defining Leaf-Area Index for Non-Flat Leaves. Plant Cell. Environ. 15: 421-429. 90
REFERENCES
Choudhari, S. D., (1977), Seasonal variation in physiological maturity of kernel sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench). Journal of Maharashtra Universities, 2: 2 – 22. Choudhary, S. D., (1992), Heterosis in high energy. Journal Agricultural Universities, 17:28-29. Comfort, S.D., G.L. Malzer and R.H. Busch. (1988). Nitrogen fertilization in spring wheat genotypes: Influence on root growth and soil water depletion Agron. J. 80: 114-12. Craufurd, P. Q. and Peacock, J. M., (1993), Effect of heat and drought stress on sorghum II Kernel yield. Experimental Agriculture, 29(1):77-86. Dabholkar, A. R., Bhadouriya, N. S. and Mishra, V. K., (1970), Combing ability analysis of some physiological attributes of sorghum. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities, 20:435-437. Daughtry, C. S. T., (1990). Direct measurements of canopy structure. Remote Sensing Reviews, 5: 45-60. Daughtry, C.H.T, Walthall, c.i., Kim, M.S., de Colstoun, E.B., McMurtrey III, J.E., (2000). Estimating corn leaf chlorophyll concentration from leaf and canopy reflectance. Remote Sens. Environ. 74,229-239. De Wit, C.T.(1958). Transpiration and crop yields.Versl.Landbouwk. Onderz.no.
64.6.Inst.Biol.Chem
Res.Field
Crops
and
Herbage,
Wageningen, the Netherlands. Deepak, M. Wattal P.N. and Byth, D.E. (1992).Irrigation management of soybean (Glycine max L.) in a semi – tropical environment.1. Effect of irrigation frequency on growth, development and yield. Aust.J. Agric.Res.43:1003-1017. 91
REFERENCES
Donald, C. M., (1962), In earch of yield. Journal of Australian Institute of Agricultural Sciences, 28:171-178. Donald, C.M., and J.Hamblin. (1976). the biological yield and harvest index of cereals as agronomic and plant breeding criteria. Adv. Agron. 28:361-405. Donatelli, M., Hammer, G. L., and Vanderlip, R. L., (1992), Genotypic and water limitation effects on phenology growth and transpiration efficiency in kernel sorghum. Crop Science, 32(3):781-786. Doorenbos,J.and W.O.Pruitt,(1975). Guidelines for prediction of crop water requirements. Irriga.Drai.Paper No.24, FAO, Rome, Italy, pp: 179. Eastin, J. D., (1983), Sorghum. In: Proceedings of the Symposium of Potential Productivity of Field Crops under different Environments. IRRI, Los Bonas Manilla, Philliphines, pp. 181 – 204. Egila, J.N., F.T.Jr. Davies and M.C. Drew. (2001). Effect of potassium on drought resistance of Hibiscus rosa-sinensis cv. Leprechaun: plant growth, leaf macro and micronutrient content and root longevity. Plant Soil, 229: 213-224. Egli, D.B. (1985). The effect of source-sink alterations on soybean seed growth. Ann. Bot. (London) 55:395–402. Egli, D.B. (1990). Seed water relations and the regulation of the duration of seed growth in soybean. J. Exp. Bot. 41:243–248. Egli, D.B. (1997). Species differences in seed water status during seed maturation and germination. Seed Sci. Res. 7:3–11. Erick, H. V. and Hanway, J. J., (1965), some factors affecting development of longevity of leaf of corn. Agronomy Journal, 57: 1– 12. 92
REFERENCES
Erick, H. V. and Musick, J. T., (1979), Plant water stress effects on irrigated sorghum I Effect on yield. Crop, 19:589-592. Fassnacht, K.S., Gower, S.T., Norman, J.M., McMurtrie, R.E., (1994). A comparison of optical and direct methods for estimating foliage surface area index in forests. Agric. For. Meteorol., 71: 183-207. Fischer, K. S., and Wilson, G.L., (1971), Studies on kernel production in (Sorghum vulgare L. Moench) I the contribution of pre-flowing photosynthates to kernel yield. Australian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 22:33-37. Fischer, K.S. (1975). Studies of kernel production in Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench: III. The relative importance of assimilate supply, kernel growth capacity and transport system. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 26:11–23. Fisher, R.A.,( 1985).Number of kernels in wheat crops and the influence of solar radiation and temperature.J.Agri.Sci.Camb.105, 447-461. Gangadhar RAO, D. and Sinha, S. K., (1988), Leaf water relations of sorghum hybrids and their parents. In: Proceedings of International Congress of Plant Physiology, New Delhi, 2:885-889. Garrity, D. P., Sullian, C.Y. and Watts, D.G. (1983), Moisture deficits and kernel sorghum performance: drought stress conditioning. Agronomy Journal, 75(6):997-1004. Garrity, D. P., Sullian, C.Y. and Watts, D.G. (1984), Changes in kernel sorghum stomatal and photosynthetic response to moisture stress growth stage. Crop Science, 24(1):441-446.
93
REFERENCES
Ghassemi. F, Jakerman .A.J, Nix HA (1995). Salinisation of land and water resources: human causes, extent, management and case studies. CAB International, Wallingford, UK, p. 526. Gill PK, Sharma .A.D, Singh P, Bhullar SS (2001). Effect of various abiotic stresses on the growth, soluble sugars and water relations of sorghum seedlings grown in light and darkness. Bulg. J. Plant Physiol. 27(1-2): 7284. Gonalez-hernadez, (1985) Growth efficiency of four sorghum genotypes. Sorghum Newsletter, 28:118. Gonalez-hernadez, Manjarrez-Sandoval, P., and Mandoza-Onofre, L.E. (1992), Drought stress effect on dry matter production and distribution in sorghum plants. Sorghum Newsletter, 33:56. Gower, S. T., Kucharik, C. J., Norman, J. M., (1999). Direct and indirect estimation of leaf area index, fAPAR, and Net Primary Production of terrestrial ecosystems. Remote Sens. Environ., 70, 29-51. Graeff, S., Claupein, W., (2003). Quantifying nitrogen status of corn (Zea mays L.) in the field by reflectance measurements. Eur. J. Agron. 19, 6ll618. Hamilton, R.I. (1982). Compensation in kernel yield components in a panicle of rainfed sorghum. Ann. Appl. Biol. 101:119–125. Hammer GL, Muchow .R.C. (1994). Assessing climatic risk to sorghum production in water –limited subtropical environments.I.Devlopment and testing of a simulation model. Field Crop Research 36,221-234.
94
REFERENCES
Hammer, G.L., VanderlipP, R.L., Gipson, G., Wade, L.J., Henzell, R.G., D.R. Founger, J. Warren and Dale A.B. (1989), Genotype-byenvironment interaction in kernel sorghum II. Effects of temperature and photoperiod on ontogeny. Crop Science, 29(2):376-384. Harlan J.R. and de Wet J.M. (1972).A simplified classification of cultivated sorghum. Crop Sci., 12, pp 172-176. Heiniger, R.W. (1993 a). Caryopsis weight patterns within the sorghum panicle. Crop Sci. 33:543–549. Heiniger, R.W. (1993 b). Influence of pollination pattern on intrapanicle caryopsis weight in sorghum. Crop Sci. 33:549–555. Heinrich, G.M. (1985). Mechanisms of yield stability in sorghum. Crop Sci. 25:1109–1113. Hermus, R.C., Fukal, S. and Wilson, G.L. (1982), Quantitative studies of water stress in sorghum. . Sorghum Newsletter, 25:125. Hiremath, S.M. and Pavatikra S.R. (1985), Growth and yield analysis in sorghum identification of genotypes with low leaf area and high dry matter production. Sorghum Newsletter, 28:108. Hou, H.T., Zhang, S.Y. and Zao, G.D. (1987), a preliminary study on the inheritance of drought tolerance in sorghum. Herbitas, China 9 (5): 8-12. Hsio, T.C. (1973). Plant responses to water stress. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol., 24: 519-570. Hukkeri, S. B. and Shuklan N.P. (1983), Effect of soil moisture stress at different stages of growth on the fodder yield of MP Chair sorghum. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science, 53(1): 44-48. 95
REFERENCES
Ibrahim. A.H (2004). Efficacy of exogenous glycine betaine application on sorghum plants grown under salinity stress. Acta. Bot. Hungarica. 43(34): 307-318. Igartua E, Gracia MP, Lasa JM (1994). Characterization and genetic control of germination, emergence responses of kernel sorghum to salinity. Euphytica 76(3): 185-193. Igartua E, Gracia MP, Lasa JM (1995). Field responses of kernel sorghum to a salinity gradient. Field Crops Res. 42: 15-25. Jain, K. K. and Kulashreshta, V.P., (1976), dwarfing genes and breeding for yield in bread wheat. Pflangenziecht, 76:102-112. Jaynes, D.B., Colvin, TS., Karlen, D.L., Cambardella, C.A, Meek, D.W., (2001). Nitrate loss in subsurface drainage as affected by nitrogen fertilizer rate. J. Environ. Qual. 30, 1305-1314. Jenner, C.F. (1979). Kernel-filling in wheat plants shaded for brief periods after anthesis. Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 6:629–641. Jeyaprakash, P., Ganapathy, S. and Armugan Pillai, (1997), Correlation and analysis in sorghum. Annals of Agricultural Research, 18(3): 309-312. Joshi, M.W. and Jamadagni, B. M., (1990), Physiological characters in relation to yield in rabi sorghum. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities, 15:228-229. Joslyn, M.A. (1970).Method in food Analysis, physical, chemical and Insrumental Method of Analysis.2 nd Ed. Academic Press. New York and London.
96
REFERENCES
Kadam, G. N., Gadakh, S. R. and Awari, V. R., (2002), Physiological analysis of rabi sorghum genotypes for shallow soil. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities, 27(3): 274-276. Kamoshita, A., Muchow, R. C., Cooper, M. and Fulkai, S., (1996), Influence of genotype and environment on the utilization of nitrogen by kernel sorghum. In, Foale, M. A. Henzell, R.G. and Kneipp, J. F. (Eds). Proceeding Third Australian Sorghum Conference, Tamworth, 20-22 February (1996). Australian institute of Agricultural Science, Melbourne, Occasional Publication no.93, pp: 391-338. Kant, S. and U. Kafkafi. (2002). Potassium and Abiotic Stresses in Plants. Pasricha, N. S., Bansal, S.K. (Eds.), Role of potassium in nutrient management for sustainable crop production in India, Potash Research Institute of India, Gurgaon, Haryana. Kersting, J.F. (1961). Kernel sorghum caryopsis development. I. Changes in dry weight, moisture percentage, and viability. Agron. J. 53:36–38. Khizzah, B. W. and Miller, F. R.,(1992), Correlations between sorghum components of drought resistance and various agronomic characters at four locations. Sorghum Newsletter, 33:54. Kiniry, J.R. (1988). Response of kernel weight of sorghum to environment early and late in kernel filling. Agron. J. 80:606–610. Kriegshauser,T.D, Tuinstra M.R, Hancock. J.D. (2006) .Variation in nutritional value of sorghum hybrids with contrasting seed weight characteristics and comparisons with maize in broiler chicks. Crop Science 46,695-699.
97
REFERENCES
Krishnamurthy, K., Bommegowda, G. and Venugopal, N., (1974), Growth and yield differences in transplanted sorghum. Mysore Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 8: 60 – 68. Kudasomannavar, B. T., (1974), Effect of nitrogen and plant population on growth and yield of sorghum, CSH1. M. Sc. (Agri.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Kulkarini, L.P., Narayana, R. and Krishna Sastry, K.S., (1981), Photosynthetic efficiency and translocation in relation to leaf characters and productivity in sorghum genotypes. Sorghum Newsletter, 24:124-125. Kulkarni, L.P., Choudhari, S. B., Titbotkar, A. B., and Kalyankar, S. P., (1983), Relationship of physiological parameter with kernel sorghum kernel yield in sorghum under rabi Season. Sorghum Newsletter, 26:234. Kussner, R., Mosandl, R., (2000). Comparison of Direct and Indirect Estimation of Leaf Area Index in Mature Norway spruce Stands of Eastern Germany. Can. For. Res., 30: 440-447. LaFarge, T. A., and Hammer, G. L. (2002). Tillering in kernel sorghum over a wide range of population densities: modeling dynamics of tiller fertility. Ann. Bot. 90:99-110. Lamani, B. B., (1996), Influence of plant densities on portion in of assimilates during post anthesis period in rabi sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench ) genotypes.M.Sc.(Agri) Thesis , University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Lang, A.R.G., McMurtrie, R.E. and Benson, M.L., (1991). Validity of surface area indices of Pinus Radiata estimated from transmittance of the sun's beam. Agric. For. Meteorol., 57: 157-170. 98
REFERENCES
Le Dantec, V., Dufrene, E., Saugier, B., (2000). Internal and Spatial Variation in Maximum Leaf Area Index of Temperate Deciduous Stands. Forest Ecol. Manag., 134: 71-81. Lin, J. L. and Yeh, M. S., (1990), Variation in the growth dynamics of sorghum cultivars. Journal of Agricultural Forestry, 39(2): 63 – 67. Locke, M.A, Hons, P.M., (1988). Effect of N rate and tillage on yield, N accumulation and leaf N concentration of kernel sorghum. Soil Tillage Res. 12,223-233. Ludlow, M. M., Santamaria, J. M. and Fulkals, (1990), Contribution of osmotic adjustment to kernel yield in sorghum under water limited condition II Water stress after anthesis. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 41(1):67-68. Lux A, Luxova M, Abe J, Tanimoto E, Hattori T, Inanaga S (2003). The dynamics of silicon deposition in the sorghum root endodermis. New Phytol., 158: 437-441. Mahalakshmi, V., and Bidinger, F. R., (2002), Evaluation of staygreen germplasm lines at ICRISAT. Crop Science, 42:965-974. Makinde, A. A., N.J. Bello, F.O. Olasantan., M.A. Adebisi and H.A. Adeniyi.(2011).Seasonality and Crop Combination effects on Growth and Yield
of
two
Sorghum/maize/Okra
intercopin
a
Forest-savanna
transpiration zone of Nigeria.Agricultural Journal. Vol. 6, Issue 3, page 92-99. Marshner, H., (1995). Mineral nutrition of higher plants. 2nd ed., Academic press, San Diego, California, USA. Martínez-Carrasco, R. (1979). Physiological factors limiting kernel size in wheat. J. Exp. Bot. 30:669–679. 99
REFERENCES
Mastroilli, M., Defilippis, R., Incarnato, D., Katerji, N., Janota Dos Santos, M. and Aloni, B., (1992), Consequences of temporary drought at different growth stages on sorghum yield pp: 104-105. In Proceeding Second Congress of European Society for Agronomy, Warwick University, 23-28 August 1992. Mathews, R. B., Azam – Ali, S.N. and Peacock, J. M., (1990b), Response of four sorghum lines to m mid-season drought I Growth, water use and yield. Field Crop Research, 25(3-4):279-296. Mc Cree, K. J., Kallisen, C. E., and Richardson, S. G., (1984), Carbon balance of sorghum plants during plants during osmotic adjustment water stress. Plant Physiology, 76:898-902. Monteith, J.L. (1977).Climatic and efficiency of crop production in Britain.Philos. Trans.R.Soc., London B 281:277-294. Muchcow, R. C. and Coates, D. B., (1986), An analysis of the environmental limitation to yield of irrigated kernel sorghum during the dry season in tropical Australian using a radiation interception model. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 37:135-148. Muchow, R. and Carberry, P. S., (1990), Phenology and leaf area development in tropical kernel sorghum. Field Crops Research, 23:221-237. Muchow, R. C., (1989), Comparative productivity of maize, sorghum and pearl millet in a semi-arid tropical environment. I yield potential. Filed Crop Research, 20(3):207-219.
100
REFERENCES
Myers, R., J., K., Keefer, G. D. and Foale, M. A., (1986), Sorghum growth and development in the tropical and sub – tropical environments growth rate, kernel yield and yield components. In : Proceedings of the First Australian Sorghum Conference. (M.A. Fale, R. G. Henzel Eds., Gatton, Queensland Australia pp: 455- 463. Nandwal, A.S., A. Hooda and D. Datta. (1988). Effect of substrate moisture and potassium on water relation and C, N and K distribution in Vigan radiata. Biol. Plant., 41: 149-153. Norem, M.S., Dobrenz, A. K. and Voigt, R. L., (1985), Protein and other quality components of drought tolerant sorghum grown with an irrigation gradient system. Sorghum Newsletter, 28-126. Omany, G. O., Ayieecho, P. I. and Nyabundi, J. O., (1997), Variation for adaptability to dryland condition in sorghum. African Crop Science Journal, 5(2):127-138. Parvatikar, S. R.and Hiremath, S. M., (1985), Growth and yield analysis in sorghum optimizing yield levels sorghum. Sorghum Newsletter, 28: 108. Patel, D.V., Makne, V.G. and Patil, R.A., (1994), Outer- relationship and path coefficient studies in sweet stalk sorghum. Journal of Maharashtra Agricultural Universities, 19:40-41. Patil, K. D. and Prabhakar, M., (2001), Evaluation of diverse source of rabi germplam for physiological traits associated with drought adaptation. National Seminar on Role of Plant Physiology for Sustaining Quality and Quantity of food production in Relation to Environment, UAS, Dhawad, pp: 144.
101
REFERENCES
Patil, S. L., (2002), Sorghum hybrids and varieties suitable for post rainy – season cultivation in Northern Karnataka, India. International Sorghum Millets Newsletter, 43: 46 – 48. Patil, S. L., Sheelavantar, M. N. and Lamans, V. K., (2003), Correlation analysis among growth and yield components of winter sorghum. International Sorghum and Millets Newsletter, 44:2003-14-17. Pawar, S. M. and Cheti, M. B., (1997), genotypic differences in osmoregulations and their relationship with biomass and kernel yield in rabi sorghum. Annals of Plant Physiology, 11(1):10-14. Peng, S.B., Krieg, D. R. and Grima, F. S., (1991), Leaf photosynthetic rate correlated with biomass and kernel production in kernel sorghum lines. Photosynthesis Research, 28(1):1-7. Phillips, RE., Blevins, R.L., Thomas, G.W., Frye, W.W. and Phillips, S.H., (1980). No-tillage agriculture. Science, 208: 1108-1113. Pinjari, M. B. and Shindhe, M.S., (1995), Studies on the morpho-physiological traits contributing to the kernel yield in sorghum hybrids. Annals of plant Physiology, 9:161-163. Quinby, J.R, Hesketh, J.D. and Voigt, R. L. (1973), Influence of temperature and photoperiod on floral initiation and leaf number in sorghum. Crop Science, 13:243-246. Quinby, J.R. (1967), The maturity gene of sorghum. Advances in Agronomy, 19:267-3-5. Rajan, I., Tollennar, M, (1999).Source-sink ratio and leaf senescence in maize.I.dry matter accumulation and partitioning during the kernel period.Field Crops Res.90, 245-253. 102
REFERENCES
Rama Rao, N., (1986). Potassium nutrition of pearl millet subjected to moisture stress. J. Potassium Res., 2: 1-12. Rao, C.L. N. and Shivaraj, A. (1988), Effect water stress on kernel growth of glossy and non-glossy varieties of kernel sorghum. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science, 58(10):770-773. Rao, C.L.N. (1999), Effect of water stress on growth , yield and yield components of glossy and non-glossy lines of kernel sorghum .Journal of Research, Acharya N.G Ranga Agricultural University 27(4):38-44. Rao, S. S, Seetharama, N., Kiran Kumar, K. A.and Vanderlip, R. L., (2004), Characterization of sorghum growth stages. NRCS Bulletin Series NO. 14. National Research center for Sorghum, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, AP: 1-15. Ravindranath, P. and Shivaraj, A. S., (1983), effect of moisture stress on growth, yield components of field grown sorghum varieties having a glossy and non-glossy leaves. Indian Journal Science, 53(6): 428-430. Roberts, S.K. (1998) Regulation of K+ channels in maize roots by water stress and abscisic acid .Plant Physiology.116:145-153. Saini, H.S. (2000). Reproductive development in kernel crops during drought. Adv. Agron. 68:59–96. Santamaria, J. M. and Fukai, S., (1990), Contribution of osmotic adjustment to kernel yield in Sorghum bicolor (L) Moench under water – limited condition. I. Water stress before anthesis. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 41:51-65.
103
REFERENCES
Santos, F., Dos, B. G., Petrini, J. A., Assis, F. N. De and Morases D. M. D. E., (1979), Growth analysis of four kernel sorghum hybrids in peoltas In: Sorgo Resultados de Pesquisa Pelotas, Brazil. Saxena, N. P. (1985). The role of potassium in drought tolerance, Potash review, No.5, International Potash Institute, Bern. 16: 1-15. Scheduling Irrigations: A Guide for Improved Irrigation Water Management through Proper Timing and Amount of Water Application, USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Agricultural Research Service and Colorado State University Extension, 1991. Seetharama, N., (1986), Crop physiology and rabi sorghum productivity. Paper presented at 16th Annual workshop, AICSIP, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad May 14-16. Seetharama, N., Shivakumar, M. V. K., Sardar Singh and
Bedinger,
(1978), Sorghum productivity under receding soil moisture in deccan plateau. Cereal Physiology Report ICRISAT, Hyderabad: 1-8. Shankara Pandian, R., Krishnadass, Muppidat,hi N. and Chidambaram, (1993), Variability studies in kernel sorghum for certain physiological characters under water stress condition. Crop Improvement, 19(10):45-50. Sharma, K.D., A.S. Nandwal, M.S. Knhad. (1996). Potassium effects on CO2 exchange, NRA and yield of clusterbean cultivars under water stress. J. Potassium Res. 12: 412-423. Shaw R.R. (1993). Irrigation water requirements. National Engineering handbook, USDA,part 623. Chap.2.
104
REFERENCES
Shivalli, S. (2000), Characterization of morpho-physiological traits higher productivity in rabi sorghum. M. Sc. (Agi.) Thesis, University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad. Smith, N. J., (1991). Predicting radiation attenuation in stands of Douglas-fir. For. Sci, 37: 1213-1223. Snyder, F.W., and G.E. Carlson. (1984). Selecting for partitioning of photosynthetic products in crops. Adv. Agron. 37:47-72. Sriram, N. and Rao, J.S. (1983), Physiological parameters influencing sorghum yield. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 53:641-649. Sriram, N. and Rao, J.S. (1983), Physiological parameters influencing sorghum yield. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science, 53:641-649. Stickler, F.C., S. Wearden and A.W. Paul. (1961). Leaf Area Determination in Kernel Sorghum, Vol.53. No.3, p187-188. Stickler, F.C., S.Wearden, and A.W. Pauli, (1969). Leaf area determination in kernel sorghum.Agron.1.93:187-188. Subbramanian, V.B. and Maheswari, M. (1989) Comparison of physiological responses of pearl millet and sorghum to water stress Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences. Plant Sciences, 99(6): 517-522. Sweeney, D.W., and J.L. Moyer. (2007).Nitrogen Management Affects Sorghum Growth for kernel and forage. Plant management network, published 23 March 2007. Szabolcs I (1994). Soils and salinization. In: Pessarakali M (ed) Handbook of plant and crop stress. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp. 311.
105
REFERENCES
Taiz L, Zeiger E. (2006). Plant Physiology. 4th eds.Sinauer Associates Inc., MA, USA. Takzure, S.C. Phadravis, B.N. and Vitkare, D.G., (1998), Effect of winter stress at various stages on yield and its components in kernel sorghum. Annals of Plant Physiology, 2(2):176-182. Tanner, C.B., and T.R. Sinclair. (1983).Efficient water use in crop production: Research or re-search.p.1-27.in H.M Taylor et al. (ed.) Limitation to efficient water use in crop production. ASA, CSSA, and SSSA, Madison, WI. Tauli, (1964), Growth and development of sorghum in relation to drought tolerance.
Dissertation
Abstraction
International
(Science
and
Engineering), (5):23-28. Terry, A.C. (1990), Growth and development of sorghum in relation to drought tolerance.Dissartation
abstracts
International
B
(Science
and
Engineering), 51(5):213-218. Teshome, A., B.R. Baum, L. fahrig, J.K. Torrance, T.J. Arnason and I.D. Lambert. (1997). Sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] landrace variation and classification in North Shewa and SouthWelo, Ethiopia. Euphytica 97: 255-263. Thombre, M.V. Patil, R.C and Hoshi, B.P. (1982), Association of panicle components with kernel yield in sorghum. Sorghum Newsletter, 25:17-18. Tiwari, H.S., R.M. Agarval, R.K. Bhatt. (1998). Photosynthesis, stomatal resistance and related characters as influenced by potassium under normal water supply and water stress condition in rice (Oryza sativa L.). Indian J Plant Physiol., 3: 314-316. 106
REFERENCES
Tuinstra MR, Liang GL,Hicks C, Kofoid KD, Canderlip RL.(2001) Registration of KS 115 sorghum. Crop Science 41, 932-933. Turner, D. P., Acker, S. A., Means, J. E., Garman, S. L., (2000). Assessing alternative allometric algorithms for estimating leaf area of Douglas-fir trees and stands. Forest Ecol. Manag., 126: 61-76. Umar, S. and Moinuddin, (2002). Genotypic differences in yield and quality of groundnut as affected by potassium nutrition under erratic rainfall conditions. J Plant Nutr., 25: 1549-1562. Umar, S. and S.K. Bansal.. (1995). Potassium requirement of mustard under moisture stress condition. J Plant Physiol. Biochem., 22: 130-135. Umar, S., N. Rama Rao, G.S. Sekhon. (1993). Differential effects of moisture stress and potassium levels on growth and K uptake in sorghum. Indian J Plant Physiol., 36: 94-97. Van Soset, P.J., and Wine, R.H. (1967).Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous foods. The determination of plant cell-wall constituents .J.Assoc. offic.Agr.chemists 50. Verma, P.K and Eastin, J.D. (1985), genotypic difference of sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.) Moench in response to environmental stress. Sorghum Newsletter, 28:128. Verma, P.K. Wade, L.J. Peacock, J.M Seetarama, N. Prasad, J.S. and Huda, K.S, (1983), Leaf area response to water and nitrogen stress in sorghum. Sorghum Newsletter, 26: 130-132. Versteeg,M.N., and H.van Keulen.(1986).Potential crop production prediction by simple calculation methods , as compared with computer calculations.Agric.Systems 19:249-272. 107
REFERENCES
Wanous, M.K. Miller, F.R. and Rosenow, D.T. (1991) Evaluation of visual rating scales for green leaf retention in sorghum. Crop Science, 31:377387. Wenzel, W., Ayisi, K. and Donaldson, G. (1999), Selection for drought resistance in kernel sorghum. Angewandte Botanik, 73(3-4):118-121. Wenzel, W., Ayisi, K. and Donaldson, G. (2000), Importance of harvest in drought resistance of sorghum. Journal of Applied Botany, 74(5-6):203205. Westgate, M.E. (1986). Water status and the developing kernel of maize. Agron. J. 78:714–719. Willley, R.W. and Basiime, D. R., (1973), Studies on the Physiological determinants of kernel yield in five varieties of sorghum. Journal of Agriculture, Cambridge 81:537-548. Wilson, D.R., Van bavel, C.H.M. and Mccree, K.J., (1980), Carbon balance of water deficient kernel sorghum plains. Crop Science, 20:145-153. Wong,R.R., Munoz Orozco, A.and Mondozaonfre, L.E. (1983), Effect of drought on vegetative, reproductive and efficiency characteristics of sorghum varieties. Agociencia, 51:101-114. Wright, G.C., Smith, C.G. (1983). Differences between two kernel sorghum genotypes in adaptation to drought stress II Root water uptake water use. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 34(6):627-636. Yadav, S., Jyothi Lakshmi, N., Maheshwari, M. and Venkateswarlu, B., (2003), Influence of water deficit at vegetative, anthesis and kernel fillings stages on water relation and kernel yield in sorghum. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology, 10(1): 20-24. 108
REFERENCES
Young, K.J., Long, S.P., (2000). Crop ecosystem responses to climatic change: maize and sorghum. In: Reddy, K.R., Hodges, H.P. (Eds.), Climate Change and Global Crop Productivity. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, pp. 107-131. Zahao. T.Y., Shi, P. and Guo, J.A. (1983), Relationship between heterosis of photosynthetic characters and yield components in sorghum. Shanxi Agricultural Science, 9:18-21. Zhao, D., Reddy, K.R., Kakani, V.G., Read, J.J., Carter, G.A., (2003). Corn (Zea mays L.) growth, leaf pigment concentration, photosynthesis and leafhyperspectral reflectance properties as affected by nitrogen supply. Plant Soil 257, 205-217. Zhang Z, Zhang S, Yang J, Zhang J. (2008). Yield, grain quality and water use efficiency of rice under non-flooded mulching cultivation. Field Crops Research 108, 71-81. Zhao,D.,reddy,K.R.,Kakani, V.G., Kaki, and V.R. Reddy.(2005). Nitrogen deficiency effects on plant growth leaf photosynthesis and hyper spectral reflectance properties of sorghum. Cited from www.ars.usda.gov.
109
Appendix (1): Mean squares of vegetative growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo M.S Days from Days from S.O.V d.f Total leaf Days from seeding 50%flowering seeding to LAI number to 50% flowering to physiological physiological maturity maturity Blocks 2 0.7222 3.2459 0.056 0.8888 1.3888 n.s n.s n.s n.s Irrigation 2 0.3888 0.2065 0.7222 0.0555 1.0555ⁿ· Error (a) 4 0.3055 0.4591 1.5555 1.1388 4.8888 n.s n.s Fertilization 1 0.8888 0.0761 12.5* 10.8888* 46.7222* Irrigation X Fertilization 2 0.0555n.s 0.9083n.s 0.5n.s 0.7222n.s 2.3888ⁿ· Error (b) 6 0.3333 0.5007 1.1666 0.9444 4.1666 Kanipanka M.S Days from Days from S.O.V d.f Total leaf Days from seeding 50%flowering seeding to LAI number to 50% flowering to physiological physiological maturity maturity Blocks 2 1.5 1.6087 0.8888 0.8888 0.8888 n.s n.s Irrigation 2 1.1666 0.1609 1.5555* 1.5555* 3.5555n.s Error (a) 4 1.1666n.s 0.6931 0.2222 0.2222 0.8888 Fertilization 1 2* 0.0003n.s 9.3888* 9.3888* 18n.s Irrigation X Fertilization 2 1.5* 0.0258n.s 0.8888n.s 0.8888n.s 10.6666n.s Error (b) 6 0.1666 0.9731 0.8888 0.8888 7.1111
110
Appendix (2): Mean squares of TLNO in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo M.S S.O.V
d.f
Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
2 2 4 1 2 6
S.O.V
d.f
Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
2 2 4 1 2 6
26-Aug
05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
0.388n.s 0.055n.s 0.222 4.5** 0.166n.s 0.277
1.555n.s 4.666* 0.388n.s 0.5n.s 0.472 0.666 n.s 0.055 0.222n.s 0.055n.s 0.055n.s 0.388n.s 0.111 Kanipanka
1.055n.s 0.888n.s 0.722 0.222n.s 0.222n.s 0.388
0.888n.s 0.388n.s 1.805 0.222n.s 0.722n.s 0.388
2.722n.s 0.222n.s 0.722 0.055n.s 0.222n.s 1.166
0.722n.s 0.388n.s 0.305 0.888n.s 0.055n.s 0.333
M.S 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct
26-Oct
0.666n.s 0.5n.s 0.166 0.00n.s 1.5n.s
1.166* 0.5n.s 0.166 0.5 0.166n.s
0.388n.s 0.388n.s 0.388 1.388* 0.055n.s
1.055n.s 0.388n.s 1.055 0.555n.s 0.555n.s
1.388n.s 1.055n.s 1.305 0.055n.s 0.388n.s
1.388n.s 0.055n.s 0.055 0.5n.s 0.166n.s
1.5n.s 1.166n.s 1.166 2n.s 1.5n.s
0.333
0.277n.s
0.166
0.555
0.111
0.277
0.166
111
Appendix (3): Mean squares of LAI in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo M.S S.O.V
d.f
Blocks
2
Irrigation
2
Error (a) Fertilization
4 1
Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
2 6
26-Aug
05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
0.08372
0.0817
0.5123
0.5306
0.6452
3.2459
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
n.s
0.06971 0.01967
0.1463 0.0506
0.1454 0.2553
0.8654 0.5849
0.1160 0.3877
0.2065n.s 0.4591
0.00092n.s
0.1816n.s
0.6149n.s
0.1418n.s
0.2422n.s
0.0761n.s
0.00009n.s 0.18707
0.0243n.s 0.1693 Kanipanka
1.0708n.s 0.5742
0.2303n.s 0.1021
0.1221n.s 0.8505
0.9083n.s 0.5007
M.S S.O.V
d.f
Blocks Irrigation
2 2
Error (a)
27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct
0.7281
0.2054
0.8188
0.4120
0.7195
1.6087
4
0.1397n.s 0.1690
0.2136n.s 0.5983
0.0012n.s 0.5605
0.3109n.s 0.1049
0.5068n.s 0.1846
0.1609n.s 0.6931
Fertilization
1
0.5164n.s
0.3197n.s
0.0845n.s
0.0131n.s
1.1740n.s
0.0003n.s
Irrigation X Fertilization
2
Error (b)
6
0.3066n.s 1.0503
0.3574n.s 0.2486
0.4585n.s 0.4338
0.1973n.s 0.2346
0.0122n.s 0.4738
0.0258n.s 0.9731
112
Appendix (4): Mean squares of LAR in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo M.S S.O.V
d.f
Blocks
26-Aug
05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
2
31.7066
74.4464
195.1353
141.313
149.5909
76.4487
Irrigation
2
Error (a)
4
183.1478n.s 257.1582
30.9260n.s 94.0764
38.0404n.s 107.5043
447.5881n.s 89.9945
243.9716* 30.2283
116.9935n.s 69.5447
Fertilization
1
115.9104n.s
41.8033n.s
16.51400n.s
112.0704n.s
44.4121n.s
26.6742n.s
Irrigation X Fertilization
2
Error (b)
6
99.2788n.s 273.2501
24.1021n.s 63.8026n.s 116.0533 18.1855 Kanipanka
79.8457n.s 126.6439
12.7426n.s 47.8048
105.2192n.s 90.7508
S.O.V
d.f
Blocks
M.S 27-Aug
06-Sep
16-Sep
26-Sep
06-Oct
16-Oct
2
349.0322
72.4460
58.1677
19.9931
28.0256
32.3908
Irrigation
2
Error (a)
4
103.4684n.s 283.9247
442.3931n.s 187.6923
138.3505n.s 294.1556
34.6074n.s 1.4990
362.1065** 13.2190
39.1637n.s 26.5547
Fertilization
1
2.4207n.s
128.7959n.s
39.9230n.s
0.6926n.s
3.0282n.s
36.0740n.s
Irrigation X Fertilization
2
Error (b)
6
73.3959n.s 325.9324
172.0019n.s 82.1518
81.0526n.s 52.4096
5.5625n.s 35.8307
44.4280n.s 39.5636
19.3580n.s 79.0496
113
Appendix (7): Mean squares of Root-Shoot ratio in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo M.S S.O.V
d.f
Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization
2 2 4 1
n.s
0.0054 0.0009 0.0051*
n.s
0.0001 0.0094 0.0079n.s
n.s
0.0277 0.0050 0.0007n.s
Irrigation X Fertilization
2
0.0035*
0.0087n.s
0.0054n.s
Error (b)
6
0.0006
S.O.V
d.f
Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization
26-Aug
05-Sep
15-Sep
25-Sep
05-Oct
15-Oct
25-Oct
0.0122
0.0014
0.0073
0.0001
0.0009
0.0002
0.0001
0.0027 0.0017 0.0052*
0.0099* 0.0006 0.0006*
0.0028* 0.0002 0.0001n.s
0.0037* 0.0004 0.0013*
0.0003n.s
0.00005n.s
0.0003n.s
0.0003n.s
0.0005
0.00009
0.0005
0.0002
06-Oct 0.0009 0.0122* 0.0007 0.0018*
16-Oct 0.0045 0.0004n.s 0.0033 0.0001n.s
26-Oct 0.0007 0.0094n.s 0.0022 0.0023n.s
0.0107 0.0042 Kanipanka
n.s
2 2 4 1
27-Aug 0.0007 0.0109* 0.0008 0.0076*
06-Sep 0.0003 0.0136* 0.0011 0.0137**
16-Sep 0.0020 0.0030n.s 0.0044 0.0015*
M.S 26-Sep 0.0030 0.0012n.s 0.0042 0.0059*
Irrigation X Fertilization
2
0.0001n.s
0.0001n.s
0.0002n.s
0.0010n.s
0.0005n.s
0.00009n.s
0.0011n.s
Error (b)
6
0.0010
0.0007
0.0002
0.0009
0.0002
0.0009
0.0015
116
Appendix (8): Mean squares of reproductive characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo M.S S.O.V
d.f
Wt 1000 Kernel(g)
No. of Kernel per plant
Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
2 2 4 1 2 6
130.5528 17.0962n.s 44.4858 55.4755* 84.7622* 9.1005
118664 2030927.167* 144228.1667 1059968* 219686.1667n.s 117376.7778 Kanipanka
S.O.V
d.f
Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
2 2 4 1 2 6
Wt 1000 Seed(g) 1.0736 172.8560** 15.4446 191.1012** 24.9207* 3.4962
No. of Kernel per plant 1590.2222 605543.7222** 23527.5555 47637.5555** 10292.0555* 1159.8888
117
0.3794 14.3963** 0.6255 13.8794** 4.2432** 0.3576
Kernel yield Mg ha⁻¹ 0.6709 11.7080* 0.6575 7.1328** 0.5354n.s 0.1589
M.S Biological yield Mg ha¯ ¹ 10.4667 22.2585n.s 3.8762 16.7543** 0.4481* 0.0838
Grain yield Mg ha⁻¹ 0.0421 8.8701** 0.3345 3.0053** 0.6272** 0.0186
Biological yield Mg ha¯ ¹
HI 0.0075 0.0017n.s 0.0022 0.0002n.s 0.0022n.s 0.0006
HI 0.0011 0.0002n.s 0.0005 0.0005n.s 0.0007* 0.0001
Appendix (9): Mean squares of Chemical component in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Bakrajo M.S Starch S.O.V d.f Ash% Protein% Fiber% Starch(sol)% Starch(Insol)% Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
2 2 4 1 2 6
0.0799 0.2664n.s 0.0807 0.1568n.s 0.5946n.s 0.2638
2.7812 5.5165n.s 2.2415 0.1750n.s 8.5722n.s 1.8565
2.791 1.5n.s 1.0416 4.0138n.s 7.3888n.s 3.1805 Kanipanka
0.0202 0.0535n.s 0.0130 0.0612n.s 0.1074n.s 0.0605
7.6112 51.1952n.s 125.807 20.5654n.s 6.9691n.s 4.4527
Starch (Sol +Insol)% 7.9435 50.4289n.s 125.0032 22.8735n.s 7.7950n.s 5.3926
M.S S.O.V Blocks Irrigation Error (a) Fertilization Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
d.f 2 2 4 1 2 6
Starch Ash%
Protein%
Fiber%
1.7495 1.5812* 0.2206 0.3068n.s 1.2038n.s 0.6309
15.9965 1.8296n.s 0.7890 3.1920n.s 14.3765n.s 3.7115
1.2916 0.375n.s 2.8541 0.125n.s 3.7916n.s 2.7777
118
Starch(sol)%
Starch(Insol)%
0.0282 0.0815n.s 0.0562 0.0338n.s 0.0169n.s 0.0379
3.38 13.8818n.s 2.9094 2.7534n.s 2.7534n.s 67.5144
Starch (Sol +Insol)% 4.0228 16.0023n.s 3.0234 3.3956n.s 3. 4637n.s 68.0559
Appendix(5): Mean squares of vegetative dry matter in Bakrajo location. Bakrajo M.S (g) S.O.V
26-Aug
d.f Leaf
Stem
5-Sep
Flower
Root
Leaf
5.619
122.526
15-Sep
Stem
Flower
Root
Leaf
Stem
14.620
27.102
59.948
166.162
n.s
n.s
Flower
Root
61.938
27.587
Blocks
2
Irrigation
2
Error (a)
4
16.111
8.957
3.002
89.437
14.768
39.519
114.904
510.354
258.034
195.435
95.287
Fertilization
1
12.550n.s
1.160n.s
4.166n.s
225.625n.s
30.090n.s
40.770n.s
6.578n.s
126.383n.s
16.195n.s
190.320n.s
3.399n.s
2
1.050n.s
1.277n.s
0.315n.s
92.168n.s
68.337n.s
87.346n.s
119.866n.s
209.226n.s
57.465n.s
95.310n.s
155.200n.s
6
5.927
3.770
1.8052
46.901
322.453
64.826
42.987
43.237
Leaf
25-Sep Stem Flower
Root
Leaf
Root
Leaf
Stem
28.505
0.513
533.051
290.624
119.179
235.575
n.s
n.s
n.s
Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
S.O.V
12.140 11.484
n.s
d.f
2.472 1.554
n.s
4.311
n.s
43.567
n.s
14.108
n.s
4.524
49.488 58.374 35.680 Bakrajo M.S (g) Stem
5-Oct Flower
4.535
290.682
n.s
264.966 484.796
n.s
29.033
n.s
15-Oct Flower
37.954n.s
Root
Blocks
2
104.216
Irrigation
2
42.804
n.s
Error (a)
4
430.662
51.874
59.585
62.884
129.505
84.773
11.079
22.884
200.327
101.751
191.939
7.869
Fertilization
1
409.266n.s
129.095n.s
9.116n.s
188.445*
106.74n.s
67.055n.s
581.791*
39.851n.s
62.970n.s
54.142n.s
124.767n.s
58.846n.s
2
28.784n.s
34.318n.s
0.057n.s
1.914n.s
27.225n.s
53.243n.s
64.484n.s
7.972n.s
56.795n.s
37.527n.s
79.368n.s
1.192n.s
6
140.492 66.485 38.034 Bakrajo M.S (g)
20.227
67.058
86.722
87.123
29.393
54.718
37.299
166.344
16.100
Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
S.O.V
46.640
n.s
35.101 43.807
n.s
Leaf
25-Oct Stem Flower
d.f
7.426
n.s
Root
Blocks
2
3.288
51.019
72.904
31.261
Irrigation
2
147.628**
133.857n.s
1070.741*
241.396*
Error (a)
4
4.227
Fertilization
1
Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
2 6
103.516
142.011
27.445
n.s
402.977**
414.153**
74.623*
98.959*
119.871**
32.7211*
75.567**
15.26
10.862
6.117
6.151
28.699
824.537
114
n.s
759.329 371.896
n.s
55.784
8.366
11.472
89.385 156.889
n.s
676.085 164.845
n.s
184.411 35.981n.s
Appendix(6): Mean squares of vegetative dry matter in Kanipanka location. Kanipanka S.O.V
27-Aug Stem Flower
d.f Leaf
M.S (g) 6-Sep Stem Flower
Root
Leaf
65.608
141.793
Root
Leaf
Stem
30.642
72.892
16-Sep Flower
Root
Blocks
2
Irrigation
2
104.732
Error (a)
4
83.426
10.625
3.738
99.228
35.051
45.579
6.8369
509.642
625.3210
385.598
52.493
Fertilization
1
85.805n.s
13.192n.s
58.176n.s
9.423n.s
1.662n.s
72.080*
129.497**
107.834n.s
67.993n.s
0.069n.s
92.176*
2
59.834n.s
1.4506n.s
4.668n.s
9.218n.s
12.407n.s
73.348*
0.806n.s
5.174n.s
33.669n.s
6.557n.s
9.674n.s
6
233.462
7.256
37.172
3.100
13.876
64.163
8.742
8.791
Leaf
Stem
24.273 3.610 6.899 Kanipanka M.S (g) 6-Oct Leaf Stem Flower
Root
Leaf
Stem
Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
S.O.V
669.827 n.s
47.348 10.459
n.s
d.f
27.804*
26-Sep Flower
Root
519.826
51.439
n.s
76.294
47.808
n.s
16.651
n.s
0.940
n.s
Blocks
2
876.501
Irrigation
2
90.278
n.s
Error (a)
4
276.6520
566.181
343.235
162.782
44.710
463.020
228.402
50.8132
Fertilization
1
361.025n.s
972.875n.s
51.240n.s
546.052**
1.087n.s
572.437n.s
256.662*
2
92.195n.s
100.035n.s
40.740n.s
28.432n.s
42.413n.s
180.963n.s
19.544
98.969
301.591
Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
S.O.V
6
1185.68 403.168
n.s
830.651 965.835
n.s
88.207 202.969 70.010 Kanipanka M.S (g)
d.f Leaf
Stem
26-Oct Flower
456.728
120.691
n.s
n.s
11.473
1835.102
Root
Blocks
2
149.745
22.167
1.223
57.257
Irrigation
2
586.316*
881.624*
1160.284*
484.505*
Error (a)
4
80.319
106.312
149.661
66.158
Fertilization
1
143.543**
232.733**
303.474**
19.0879n.s
2
6.238n.s
21.895n.s
57.939n.s
56.543n.s
6
8.427
8.345
12.997
21.854
Irrigation X Fertilization Error (b)
86.784
266.288
115
n.s
239.968
62.4882
29.994
396.864
n.s
0.368 617.482
49.380 n.s
16-Oct Flower
434.228
46.736n.s
Root
66.87
205.474
1148.481
159.032
286.779
511.922
130.560
1.5446n.s
28.486n.s
124.537n.s
62.479n.s
1.050n.s
128.384n.s
29.3346n.s
41.290n.s
525.910n.s
26.074n.s
44.371n.s
36.809
41.799
34.122
132.128
273.909
42.202
37.1111
136.134
n.s
209.223
n.s
1665.512*
n.s
224.480
n.s
6.3984
n.s
38.068n.s
Appendix (11): Amount and date of irrigation in Kanipanka. Months
August
Total
September
Total
October Total TOTAL
Date 9_12 13_16 17_20 21_24 25_28 29_1/9 9_14 15_20 21_26 27_1/9 Date 2_6 7_11 2_8 12_17 18_23 24_30 12_19 20_27 28_5/10 Date 1_7 8_14 15_21 6_13 14_22
IΌ 36.075 36.075 36.075 36.075 36.075 36.075 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 216.450 36.075 36.075 0.000 36.075 36.075 36.075 0.000 0.000 0.000 180.375 36.075 36.075 36.075 0.000 0.000 108.225 505.050
120
I 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 36.075 36.075 36.075 36.075 144.300 0.000 0.000 36.075 36.075 36.075 36.075 0.000 0.000 0.000 144.300 36.075 36.075 36.075 0.000 0.000 108.225 396.825
IΎ 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 36.075 36.075 36.075 36.075 144.300 0.000 0.000 36.075 0.000 0.000 0.000 36.075 36.075 36.075 144.300 0.000 0.000 0.000 36.075 36.075 72.150 360.750
Appendix (10): Amount and date of irrigation in Bakrajo.
Months
August
Total
September
Total
October Total TOTAL
Date 13_15 16_18 19_21 22_24 25_27 28_30 31_5/9 12_16 17_21 22_26 27_1/9 Date 6_11 12_17 2_9 10_17 18_23 24_30 17_24 25_2/10 Date 1_7 8_14 15_22 3_11 12_21
IΌ 23.380 23.380 23.380 23.380 23.380 23.380 23.380 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 163.660 23.380 23.380 0.000 0.000 23.380 23.380 0.000 0.000 93.520 23.380 23.380 23.380 0.000 0.000 70.140 327.320
119
I 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.380 23.380 23.380 23.380 93.520 0.000 0.000 23.380 23.380 23.380 23.380 0.000 0.000 93.520 23.380 23.380 23.380 0.000 0.000 70.140 257.180
IΎ 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.380 23.380 23.380 23.380 93.520 0.000 0.000 23.380 23.380 0.000 0.000 23.380 23.380 93.520 0.000 0.000 0.000 23.380 23.380 46.760 233.800
Summary This study was conducted at two different locations in Sulaimani region, Bakrajo and Kanipanka, during the autumn season of 2009, through implementing two different field experiments by using split-plot design, in which three irrigation treatments were implemented in main plots and conducted with Complete Randomized Block Design with three replications, and two different fertilization levels (recommended fertilization and no fertilization) implemented in two sub-plots. Each experimental unit contained four rows with 0.70m distance between each two rows, and 0.25m between plants. Means of studied characters were compared by using LSD (P≤0.05) for the effect of irrigation and fertilization treatments and their interactions on the vegetative characters, plant leaf number, leaf area index, No. of days required for 50% flowering, No. of days from 50% flowering to physiological maturity, No. of days required from seeding to physiological maturity, and reproductive characters, weight of 1000 kernels, number of kernels per plant, biological yield, kernel yield, and harvest index.Besides several destructive samples were taken for determining leaf area index expansion, dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower, and root,leaf area ratio and root-shoot ratio were also determined, along with the growth period. The results showed that there were differences in the effect of the two treatments on the studied characters in both locations, while there wasno significant effect of regulated deficit irrigation on vegetative growth characters in Bakrajo, it had significant effect in Kanipanka by decreasing the number of days required for 50% flowering and from 50% flowering to physiological maturity, but fertilization treatment T hadsignificant effect on most of vegetative growth characters by decreasing the length of days required for 50% flowering from 55.444 to 53.777 days,from 50% flowering to PM from 60.222 to 58.666 days in Bakrajo,from52.111
I
SUMMARY
to 50.666 days and from 59.111 to 57.666 days for the same periods in Kanipankadue to fertilizationandnon fertilization, respectively. There was anincreasing tendency in total leaf numbers from emergence to flowering, andstability was noticed at post flowering under the effect of irrigation treatments, but significant effect was recorded due to the effect of fertilization treatment in Kanipanka. There were no significant differences among regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatment on leaf area index expansion along the growth period, indicating the positive response of sorghum grown under water and fertilization deficit condition in both locations. Dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, root and flower of sorghum hybrid as a response to regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization were measured along with the growth period from Aug. to Oct.Results showed continuous increasing in dry matter which partitioned to plant parts, and there were significant differences among the effect of regulated deficit irrigation at the end of the growth period, in which superiority was due to I against I and I ,and fertilization T in both locations, indicating thedirect effect of water deficit and indirect effect of fertilization during the later stage of sorghum growth. In order to show the relationship between leaf area expansion and biomass accumulation, the leaf area ratio was measured, there were no significant differences of the effect of regulated deficit irrigation on leaf area ratioalong with the growth period except that measured around flowering which showed significant effect of I with I and I , but no significant difference of the effect of fertilization T was recorded, while in the case of root-shoot ratio, there were significant differences due to the effect of regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization in both locations at different stages of growth. Significant differences of the effect of regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization were shownin the studied reproductive growth characters, weight of 1000 kernels, number of kernels per plants, biological yield and kernel yield in both locations, in which I exceeded I and I , while T exceeded T significantly in II
SUMMARY
the most of studied reproductive characters, and the significant effect of interaction between the two treatments was showed by the combination of I T for biological yield and kernel yield, while the combination of I T exceeded others in 1000 kernels weight in Bakrajo, while I T exceeded most of studied reproductive characters in Kanipanka. Several analytical procedures were used for determining chemical composition of sorghum grain post harvesting, although the differences among the treatments were not significantly recorded, but all of the results were within that recorded as standard data. Water use efficiency was determined for three different periods based on dry matter accumulated in Aug., Sep., and Oct., and actual evapotranspiration or crop evapotranspiration which calculated depending on crop factor (Kc) at each growth period with reference evapotranspiration.
Maximum water use efficiency was
recorded in Oct. in Bakrajo under the effect of I , but in Kanipanka, the effect ofI exceeded others. Maximum ETc was shown under I treatment in Sep., in both locations, the minimum ETc was recorded under the effect of I and I in both locations. There were significant differences in the effect of locations on vegetative and reproductive growth characters, such as total leaf number per plant, leaf area index, Growth period from seeding to 50%flowering, from 50%flowering to physiological maturity, No. of kernels per plants, biological yield,harvest index, and dry matter accumulationand its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower, and root along the growth period, as well as leaf area ratio and root-shoot ratio. Effect of environmental factors of Kanipanka significantly exceeded Bakrajo in most of studied characters.
III
LIST OF CONTENTS Title CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1Response of sorghum to water stress 2.2Vegetative criteria 2.2.1Total leaf number per plant 2.2.2 Leaf area (LA) and (LAI) 2.2.3 Leaf area index(LAI) 2.2.4 Days to 50% flowering, and Days from 50%flowering to PM 2.3 Dry Matter Accumulation and its distribution 2.4 Root :Shoot Ratio 2.5 Reproductive criteria 2.5.1 1000-kernel weight 2.5.2 No. of kernels plant-1 2.5.3 Biological Yield (Mgha-1) 2.5.4 Kernel yield (Mg ha-1) 2.5.5 Harvest Index (HI) 2.6 Physiological Parameters 2.6.1 Water Use Efficiency (WUE) 2.6.2 Estimating crop water use 2.6.3 Effect of soil water on ET 2.7 Chemical components CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODS 3.1 Irrigation treatments 3.2 Fertilization levels 3.3 Growth criteria 3.3.1 Dry matter accumulation 3.3.2 Number of the leaves per plants (TLNO) 3.3.3 Leaf Area Ratio (LAR) 3.3.4 Root: Shoot Ratio 3.3.5 Days to 50% flowering 3.3.6 Days from 50% flowering to Physiological Maturity 3.4 Reproductivecriteria
IV
Page No. 1 4 4 5 5 6 8 10 12 15 16 16 16 18 20 23 25 25 29 30 30 32 32 33 33 33 33 33 34 34 34 34
Title 3.4.1 Number of kernels per plant 3.4.2 1000 kernels weight (g) 3.4.3 Biological yield (Mg ha-1) 3.4.4 kernel yield (Mg ha-1) 3.4.5 Harvest Index (HI) 3.5 Physiological criteria 3.5.1 Water Use Efficiency (WUE) 3.6 Chemicalcomponents 3.6.1 Starch content (%) 3.6.2 Protein content (%) 3.6.3 Ash content (%) 3.6.4 Fiber content (%) CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Effect of Regulated Deficit Irrigation on the studied characters. 4.1.1 Vegetative growth characters. 4.2 Effect of fertilization treatments on the studied characters. 4.2.1 Vegetative growth characters. 4.3 The interaction effect of regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the vegetative growth characters in Bkarajo and Kanipanka. 4.4 Total Leaf Number per plant. 4.4.1 Effect of Regulated Deficit Irrigation on the Total Leaf Number per plant. 4.4.2 Effect of fertilization treatments on the Total Leaf Number per plant. 4.5 Leaf Area Index (LAI). 4.6 Dry Matter Accumulation. 4.6.1 Effect of RDI and fertilization treatments on the Dry Matter Accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. 4.7 Leaf Area Ratio. 4.8 Root: Shoot Ratio. 4.9 Reproductive growth characters. 4.10 Water Use Efficiency and Crop Evapotranspiration. 4.11 Chemical composition. 4.11.1 Effect of RDI and fertilization treatments with interaction between RDI and fertilization treatments on the chemical composition in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. V
Page No. 34 34 34 34 34 34 34 36 36 36 36 36 41 41 41 43 43 44 46 46 48 48 53 53 62 64 66 71 75 75
Title 4.12 Effect of locations on the studied character. 4.12.1 Effect of locations on vegetative growth characters. 4.12.2 Effect of locations on the LAI. 4.12.3 Effect of locations on the Dry Matter Accumulation. 4.12.4 Effect of locations on Leaf Area Ratio. 4.12.5 Effect of locations on Root: Shoot Ratio. 4.12.6 Effect of locations on reproductive growth character. 4.12.7 Effect of location on the chemical composition of sorghum kernel. CONCLUSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS REFERENCES APPENDICES
VI
Page No. 78 78 79 80 82 82 83 84 85 86 87 110
LIST OF TABLES No. 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11
12
Table Meteorological data of Bakrajo during 2009 season (Agrometeorological Department- Sulaimani), Bakrajo (Lat. 35⁰ 33’N; Long. 45⁰ 21’ E; 750 masl.). Meteorological data of Kanipanka during 2009 season (Agrometeorological Department- Sulaimani), Kanipanka (Lat. 35⁰ 22’N; Long. 45⁰ 43’E; 545 masl.). Some physical and chemical properties of soil in both locations. Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on vegetative growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of fertilization treatments on vegetative growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on vegetative growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of fertilization treatments on the Total Leaf Number in both locations. Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the Leaf Area Index in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of fertilization treatments on Leaf Area Index in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on the leaf area index in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root in Bakrajo. Effect of fertilization treatments on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root in Bakrajo.
Page No. 38
39 40 42 44 46 48 49 51 52
55
57
13
Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower and root in Kanipanka.
59
14
Effect of fertilization treatments on the dry matter accumulation and its partitioning to leaf, stem, flower androot in Kanipanka.
61
VII
No. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Table Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area ratio in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of fertilization treatments on the leaf area ratio in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of irrigation treatments on the root: shoot ratio in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of fertilization treatments on the root: shoot ratio in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on reproductive growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of fertilization treatments on reproductive growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on reproductive growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Crop water use efficiency in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on chemicalcomposition of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka Effect of fertilization treatments on chemical composition of sorghumin Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of interaction between regulated deficit irrigation and fertilization treatments on chemical composition of sorghum in Bakrajo and Kanipanka. Effect of location on vegetative growth characters. Effect of location on Total Leaf Number per plant. Effect of location on Leaf Area Index. Effect of location on the Dry Matter Accumulations Effect of location on Leaf Area Ratio. Effect of location on Root: Shoot Ratio. Effect of location on reproductive growth characters. Effect of location on chemical composition of sorghum kernel.
VIII
Page No. 63 63 64 65 67 68 70 72 76 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 83 84
LISTOF FIGURES No.
Figure
Page No.
1
Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the total leaf number per plant in Bakrajo.
47
2
Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the Total Leaf number of sorghum in Kanipanka.
47
3
Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area index of sorghum along withthe growth stage in Bakrajo.
50
4
Effect of regulated deficit irrigation on the leaf area index of sorghum along with the growth stage in Kanipanka.
50
5
Water Use Efficiency of sorghum determined under the effect of I , I and I in Bakrajo.
72
6
Water Use Efficiency of sorghum determined under the effect of I , I and I in Kanipanka.
73
7
Crop Evapotranspiration of sorghum determined under the effect of I1, I2 and I3 in Bakrajo.
73
8
Crop Evapotranspiration of sorghum determined under the effect of I1, I2 and I3 in Kanipanka.
74
IX
LIST OF APPENDICES No.
Appendix
Page No.
2
Means squares of vegetative growth characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Means squares of TLNO in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations.
3
Means squares of LAI in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations.
112
4
Means squares of LAR in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations.
113
5
Means squares of vegetative dry matter in Bakrajo.
114
6
Means squares of vegetative dry matter in Kanipanka.
115
1
7 8 9
Means squares of Root-Shoot ratio in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Means squares of reproductive characters in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations. Means squares of Chemical component in Bakrajo and Kanipanka locations.
110 111
116 117 118
10
Amount and date of irrigation in Bakrajo.
119
11
Amount and date of irrigation in Kanipanka.
120
X
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Symbol
Detail
CGR Chl DAS DM ET ETa ETc ETo GS GSI HI Insol. IWMI KC KS KW LA LAD LAI LAR N n.s NAR PM Pn RDI RUE SLA Sol. TLNO TMT TT WUE WUEC
Crop Growth Rate Chlorophyll Days After Sowing Dry Matter Evapotranspiration Actual Evapotranspiration Crop Evapotranspiration Reference Evapotranspiration Grain Stage Growth Stage 1 Harvest Index Insoluble Starch International Water Management Institute Crop Factor Soil Coefficient Kernel Weight Leaf Area Leaf Area Duration Leaf Area Index Leaf Area Ratio Nitrogen None significant Net Assimilation Rate Physiological Maturity Leaf Photosynthetic Rate Regulated Deficit Irrigation Radiation Use Efficiency Specific Leaf Area Soluble Starch Total Leaf Number of Plant Ton metric Thermal Time Water Use Efficiency Crop Water Use Efficiency
XI
الخاصة ُ لس ي ني ُ ه ُب ج ُ ُك ن ُب ن ه ُفيُ أُج يت ُه ُ ل س ُفي ُم قعين ُم ين ُفي ُم ُتص يمُ ل عُ ل ش ُ ُأُس متُ ل يف ُ 9002لكُعنُ يقُت ي ُ س ينُم ينُمي نيُ ُبأس ُ ُ ثاث ُمس ي ُ ُ ضعت ُفيُ ل ع ُ ل ئيسي ُ ب يقُتص يمُ ل ع ُ لعش ئي ُب ا ُم أس متُأث ين ُمن ُمس ي ُ ل س ي ُ ه ُ( ُ ل س ي ُ ُب ُ ل س ي ُ)ُب ضع مُفيُ ل ع ُ ل ن ي ُُ .كلُ ُ ب س ف ُُ 07.0بينُ ق ع ُ ئيسي ُتح ُع ُق ع ينُث ن ي ُ ُكلُق عُث ن ي ُتح ُع ُأ بع ُخ ُأقلُف ُمع ُ(ُ)LSDع ُ ُبأس ُ مس ف ُُ 07.0بينُكلُن ُ .أج يتُم ن ُ ل س ل مس ُُ ُ0700تأثي ُكلُمنُمع م ُ ل ُ ُمع م ُ ل س ي ُ ُتأثي ُ ل خلُبي ع ُ لص ُ ل ي ل جي ُُ, ُ ُ ,ليل ُ ل س ح ُ ل قي ُُ ,ع ُ أي ُح ُُ %00تزهي ُ ,ع أي ُمن ُُ%00 ُ ُ /ل م ل ُع ُ أ تزهي ُح ُ ل جُ ل س جي ُُ ,ع أي ُمنُ لز ُح ُ ل جُ ل س جي ُُ ,معُم ن ُ لح صلُُ ُ ,ألفُ ُ ُُ/ن ُ ُ,لح صلُ ل ي ل ج ُُ,ح صلُ لح ُ ُ,ليلُ لحص ُع ُتح ي ُبعضُمنُ ل ب ُ,ع ُ ل ل ح ي ُأ ُت سيعُفيُ ليلُ ل س ح ُ ل قي ُُ ,تج يعُ ل ُ لج ف ُ ُت يع ُأجز ء ُ لح صلُ ل يُت نُ ُم سمُ ل ُ . ُ ُ,لس ُ ُ,أ ه ُ,لج ُ,نس ُ ل س ح ُ ل قي ُُ,نس ُ لج ُ/لس ُع ُ أ خاص ُأس ج ُ ل حثُهيُ : س ُل لُمنُ ُُُُُُُُُُُ ج ُف ق ُل أثي ُكلُمنُ ل ُ ل قصُ ل مُ ُ ل س ي ُع ُج يعُ لص ُ ل ُغي ُمع ُن يج ُُل أثي ُ ُ(ب ج ) ُلص ُ ل ُ ل ل قعينُُ ,في ُحينُ أس ج ُ ل بع ُل ُ( ُك ني ُب ن ه ُ) ُعن ُ يق ُت يل ُع ُ أي ُ ل ُ ل قص ُ ل م ُ ُ ,ل ن ُأُث ُبش ل ُمع ُفي ُم لا م ُل ص ُإل ُُ%00تزهي ُمعُُ%00منُ ل زهي ُح ُ ل جُ ل س جي ُُ ,ل نُمع م ُ ل س ي ُ T1لهُ ُعنُ يقُت يلُع ُ أي ُ لا م ُإل ُ ُ%00ل زهي ُمنُ تأثي ُمع ُع ُأك ي ُص ُ ل ُ ل (ُ007555إل ُُ077...ي ُ أي ُمنُ ُ%00ل زهي ُح ُ ل جُ ل س جيُمنُُ207...إل ُُ067222ي ُ في ُم قع ُب ج ) ُُ ,منُ(ُ 0.7555إل ُُ 007222ي ُ ُمنُُ 017555إل ُُ 0..222ي ُ) ُفيُن سُ ل قتُفيُ ُ ل ُح ُ ل زهي ُ, ُمنُ ُ م قعُ(ُك ن ُب ن ه ُ)ُع ُكلُمنُُ . T1ُ ُ T0بش لُع ُع ُ أ ُبع ُ ل زهي ُتحتُتأثي ُمس ي ُ ل ُُ ,ل نُسج تُتأثي ُمع ُبس بُتأثي ُ ل ح تُت يتُع ُ أ لس ُفيُم ُ(ُك ُب ن ُ)ُ ُ,ع ُ ج ُأ ُف ُمع ُم ُبينُُكلُمنُ ل ُ ل قصُ ل مُ ُ ل س ي ُ ُم ُ ل ُ ُ ,ج ُ ل ليلُ إيج بيُإس ج ب ُن ُ ل ُ ل ي ءُ ع ُت سيعُ ليلُمس ح ُ ل قي ُع ُ ن يج ُتأثي ُكلُمنُ ل ُ ل قصُ ل مُ ُ ل س ي ُل اُ ل قعين ُُ,تج يعُ ل ُ لج ف ُ ت يع ُأجز ءُ ُ ُ ,لس ُ ُ ,أ ه ُ ,لج ُ ,في ُ ل ُ ل ي ء ُ ل جي ُله ُ أس ج ب ُل ل ُمن ُ ل ُ لح صل ُ ه ُ أ ل قصُ ل مُ ُ ل س ي ُ ل يُتمُقي س ُفيُم ُ ل ُمنُش ُُ 1إل ُش ُُ .50ت ُل ُ لزي ُفيُتج يعُ ل ُ لج ف ُ ت يع ُأجز ءُ لح صل ُُ ,ك لكُف ق ُمع ي ُن يج ُتأثي ُ ل ُ ل قصُ ل مُفيُن ي ُ ُُ, ُI3 ُ ُI2 ُمن ُكل ُع ُI1 ُ ُ ل ئق ُ ل أثي ل
1
ل اص
ك لكُمع م ُ ل س ي ُُ T1ل اُ ل قعين ُ ُ ,ل يُ ُن ُ ل ُ ل ي ءُ . م ش ُبع ُف
ُ ل أثي ُ ل ش ُل صُ ل
ُ معُتأثي ُ ل س ي ُ لغي ُ
ُُُُُُُُُُُأجلُمش ه ُ لعاق ُبينُت سيعُ ل س ح ُ ل قي ُ ُتج يعُ ل ُ لج ف ُُ,نس ُ ل س ح ُ ل قي ُ ل يُ تمُقي س ُُ ,ف ق ُغي ُمع ي ُُتأثي ُمنُ ل ُ ل قصُ ل مُع ُنس ُ ل س ح ُ ل قي ُفيُف ُ ل ُ ُف ق ُغي ُمع ي ُب أثي ُ ع ُف ُ ل زهي ُ ل يُتمُقي س ُله ُتأثي ُمع ُ ُُ I1معُُُ ,ُ I3ُ ُ ُ I2ل نُ مع م ُ ل س ي ُ ُ T1ل ُسج تُُ ,فيُحينُنس ُ لج ُ /لس ُل ُف ق ُمع ي ُبس بُتأثي ُ ل ُ ل قصُ ُ ُ.ل ق ُ ل ع ي ُن يج ُتأثي ُ ينُفيُم حلُ ل ُ ل ل مُ ُ ل س ي ُ ل يُتمُقي س ُفيُكاُ ل ُُ /ن ُُ, ل ُ ل قصُ ل مُ ُ ل س ي ُ ل يُتمُقي س ُع ُم ن ُ لح صلُ ُألفُب ُُ ,ع ُ ل لح صلُ ل ي ل جيُُ,ح صلُ لح ُل اُم قعينُُ,فيُحينُأ ُI1ل أثي ُ ل ئقُ ُُI1ع ُكلُمنُُI3ُ ُI2 ُ ُ T1ل أثي ُ ل ئق ُع ُُ T0بش ل ُمع ُفي ُأُك ي ُص ُ لح صل ُ ل ي ُ ِست ُ ُ ,تأثي ُ ُ ,ل ن ُأ ل خا ُمع ي ُم ُبينُُ I1ُ ُ T1ل ح صلُ ل ي ل جيُ ح صلُ لح ُُ,فيُحينُُ ُ I2ُ T1له ُ ل أثي ُ ل ئقُ ُألفُب ُفيُم قع ُ(ُب ج )ُُ,فيُحينُُ ُ I1ُ ُ T1له ُ ل أثي ُ ل ئقُع ُأك ي ُص ُ لح صلُفيُ ل م قعُ(ُك ن ُب ن هُ)ُُ . ُُُُُُُُُُُُه ُ لع ي ُمنُ ل ع ا ُ ل ح ي ي ُ ل يُتمُأس م ُل ن ُ ل ي ي ئي ُ ل ج ُفيُح ُ ل ل ي ءُبع ُ لحص ُك نتُقي سي ُب ل غمُمنُع ُ ج ُف ق ُبينُ ل ع ما ُبش لُمع ُُ .
ُ
ُفيُ أش ُ(ُ1,ُ6 ُ ل ئيُ(ُ)WUEسُج تُفيُكاُم قعينُ ُفيُثا ُم حلُم ُُُُُُُُُُُك أ ُ أس ُ )50,معُ ل ي ُ لح ي يُ ل يُتمُقي س ُب س ُمع ملُ ل ُ(ُ)Kcل لُم مُفيُف ُ ل جُمعُمص ُ ل ي ُُ.أقص ُ ج ُ(ُ)WUEسُج تُفيُش ُُ50فيُم قعُ(ب ج )ُتحتُتأثي ُ I3ل نُفيُم قعُ(ُك ن ُ ب ن هُ)ُُI2لهُ ل أثي ُ ل ئقُع ُ ل س ي ُ أخ ُُ ُ.أقص ُ ج ُ(ُ)Etcسُج تُفيُش ُُ1بس بُتأثي ُُُI1 ل اُ ل قعينُُ,سُج تُأُ ن ُ ج ُ(ُُ)Etcفيُكاُ ل قعينُتحتُتأثي ُكلُمنُُ.ُI3ُ ُI2أ ُتأثي ُم قعُ ل حثُ ُمنُ ي ُ ُص ُ لح صل ُم ل ُ ُ ,ُ LAIُ , TLNOل ل له ُتأثي ُمع ُل ل ُمن ُ لص ُ ل ُُ /ن ُ ُ ,لح صلُ لز ع ُح ُُ%00منُ ل زهي ُ ُمنُ ُ%00ل زهي ُح ُ ل جُ ل س جيُُ,ع ُ ل ُُ, ُأ ل ي ل جي ُُ ,ح صلُ لح ُ ُ,ليلُ لحص ُُُ ,تج يع ُ ل ُ لج ف ُُأجز ءُ لح صلُ ل ُم سمُ ل ُ .تأثي ُ لس ُ ُ ,أ ه ُ ,لج ُُُ ,نس ُ ل س ح ُ ل قي ُ ُنس ُ لج ُ /لس ُع ُ س ُفيُ ل حثُ . ُع ُأك ي ُ لص ُ ل لع ملُ ل ي ي ُفيُم قعُُ(ُك ن ُب ن هُ)ُلهُتأثي ُمع ُم ُ
2
ث خت و ك ئ و نيش ب ك ج َ و ئ نجا ناوض س يَ ان ئ ت يَ ين و ي ل ووش يَن جياو ج َ ب ج َ ك ن ووت يَ ين و م ي ن جياو و ب كان ثان ي ل هاوين , 2009ل ِيَط ب كا هيَنان يز ين ثا ض ب ش و كا ,ج َ ب ج َ ك و ب س َ مام لَ ئاو ن جياو ل ثا ض و ل ط َ يز ين ب َ ك ه م ك ي ت و و كا و ب س َ ووبا ب ون و ,و س كي كا ك ئ نجا او ك و ث ين ن ك )ل وو ثا ض ث ين ن (ث ين وو ئاست جياو جي ب ج َ َ ِيز ب وو 7.07ل نيَ ه وو هيَ َيَ و ك و .ه ي ك ي ك ت يَ ين و ك ثيَك هات و ل ض و تا ِو ك كان .ب و ك ن تيَ ِ يي كا ب تاقي ن و ك مت ين جياو ب ون 7..0ل نيَ ب َ ه ي ك ل مام لَ ئاو و مام لَ ث ين ك ( )LSDل س ئاست 0%كا يط و كا ليَ نيَ ِ َو كا ط اَ ,ما ِووب ط اَِ /وو ك ,لي مام لَ كا ل س خ س َ ت س و يي كا ,ما تاك و ثيَط يين ف ي َ ل َ ى ,و ِ َو كا ل 07%ط و َ ك ,ما ب َ ط شتن ب 07%ط و َ ك ,ه و ها خ س َ ت ب ه م ي كا ,كيَش ما ِ َو كا ل ضان ن و تا ك و ثيَط يين ف ي َ ل َ ن ويَ َ ,ه و ها لي ن كا ِ /وو ك,ب ه م باي َ ل َ ج ,ب ه م 0777نك ,ما ويَن ,جط ل يا ل ست نيشا ك ن ض ن ن ون ي ك ب َ يا ك ن ه ف و ب ونيَك ل ووشك و ك ث َ ليَن ك و ب َ ه ي ك ل ما ط اَكان ,ك َ ك ن و ِووب لي ب ه ما ِ ط/ق ب يَ يي ماو ط ش ك ِووب ط اَ و ِ يَ ط اَ,ق ,ط َ ِ ,ط ِ ,يَ ست نيشا ك و . شي َ ت نين
نجام ت يَ ين و ك ب شيَ ي ك
ب ين و :
ت يَ ين و يا ئ و خ س َ تان ه وو مام لَ ك ل س ل كا يط ب ون جياو و و تا ن ب و ل س ك و ل ه وو ش يَن ك ,ل كاتيَ ) (RDIكا يط ئاو ن ك م و ِيَ ه ب و ل كان ثان ل ِيَط ك و تا ل س خ س َ ت س و يي كا ل ب ك ج َ ,ب اَ كا يط و ه و ها ل 07%ط َ ك ن و تاك و ِ َو ثيَ ي ت كا ب َ 07%ط َ ك ما ك نو ثيَط يين ف ي َ ل َ ,ب اَ مام لَ َو ب هب و لس T1كا يط ي ك و تا ث ين ل ط و َ ك ِ َو ثيَ ي ت ب َ 07% خ س َ ت س و يي كا ل ِيَط ك ك ن و ماو ( 00.555ب َ َ ِ 07.000و و ِ َو كا ل 07%ط َ ك ب َ ثيَط يين ف ي َ ل َ ل 27....ب َ َ ِ 06.222و ل ب ك ج َ ) ,و ل ( 0..000ب َ َ 07.222و و ل 01.000ب َ َ ِ 00.222و ) ل ه ما ماو ل كان ثان ب َ ه ي ك ل T1ب َ .T0ما طشت ط اَكا يا ك وو ل ك وتن تا ط َ ئاست كان ئاو ,ب اَ ل يَ كا يط ,و جيَطي ب و تيَ ين ك و ل و ط و َ ك ك كا يط ت َ ما ك و و تا كا يط بهَ
1
ث خت
ث ين ك ن و ل كان ثان .هيض جياو ي ك و تا و تا ت َ ما ك و ب ه َ كا يط كا يط لي ف و ب ون لس و و مام لَ ث ين ك ن ب و ل نيَ )(RDIئاو ن ك م و ِيَ طش ط اَ ب يَ يي ماو ط ش ك ,نيشان يَ ئ يَن ه ب و ل و اَم ن و ِووب ل ه وو ناوض ك .ك َ ك ن و ما ك م ئاو و ث ين ك ط ن شام سث ل يَ كا يط ووشك و ك ب ك و ب َ ه ي ك ل ط اَ,ق ,ط َ ِ ,ط ل ط ن شام سث وو ِ ط و اَم ن و ك ثيَ و ل ماو ط ش ك ن و و مام لَ ث ين ك ه ب و ه ي ك ل ئاو ن ك م و ِيَ ووشك ك ك يا ب و ب و ك َ ك ن و ما ل مانط 1ب َ .07ئ نجام كا ئ و نيشا ه ب و ل كا يط ِوو ك ك ,و ه و ها جياو ي ك و تا ب و ب س ب ش كان ب َ ب َ I1ب س ه ي ك ل و كا يط و ل ك َ تاي ماو ط ش ك ن ئاو ن ك م و ِيَ I2و ,I3و ه و ها ث ين ك T1ل ه وو ناوض ك ,ك نيشا ل ماو كان و ت نا ِ ست وخ َ ث ين ك ك م ئاو ل ط َ كا يط
و ب كا يط ِ ست وخ َ ط ش ط ن شام .
ووشك ط اَوك َ ك ن و ما ف و ب ون ِووب ل ثيَناو ثيشان ن ث ي ن ل نيَ ئاو ن ك م و ن ب و ب كا يط و تا ط اَ ك ثيَ ن ك و ,جياو ِووب ِ ,يَ ِووب ولس ط اَ ل ماو ط ش ك ن جط ل و ك ثيَ ن ك و ل كات ط َ ِ يَ ِ يَ و تا ن ب و ب كا يط ه ب و ل I1ل ط َ I2و, I3ب اَ جي ك ن ك كا يط يي ك و تا T1ك ت َ ما ك و ث ين ئاو ن ك م و كا يط ق َ ناغ جياو كان ط ش ك ن و لس خ ثيشا ك ب هم بس
باي َ ل َ ج
,ب ه م
I2و ,I3ل كاتيَ
ِ يَ ,ل كاتيَ و لط ِ يَ و تا .جياو سَ ت ب ه م ن وي َ َ ل ه
T1كا يط
َ ب
ي ك و تا ِ ط/ق جياو هب و بهَ ك ت َ ما ك و ل ه وو ناوض ك ل َ ث ين ك و و ل ط َ ث ين ل كا يط ى او ن ك م و ِيَ ن كا ِ /وو ك, ي كا ,كيَش 0777نك ,ما َ ب و وو ناوض ك ,ل كاتيَ I1و كا يط َو ب خ س َ ت و ب س T0ب شيَ ي ك و تا ل و تا
كا ليَ
نيَ ه وو مام ل َكا I1T1ب َ َ ب و ب َ كيَش 0777نك
ب ه م ي كا ت يَ ين و ك ,و كا يط ن ويَ َ ,ل كاتيَ T1I2كا يط ب ه م باي َ ل َ ج و ب ه م َ ب و ل َو ب خ س َ ت ب ه م ي كا ت يَ ين و ك ل ب ك ج َ ,ل كاتيَ I1T1كا يط ثان .
ل كان
ب كا هات و ب َ ثيَك هات و كي ياوي كا ل ن ىط ن شام سث نجام شي ا ض ن ين ب اَ َو ب مام لَ كان ب شيَ ي ك و تا ِ ن ب ون جياو و يَن س ل و ل ني َ نجام كا ب شيَ ي ك ثيَ ن ي ي . ووشك ت نا ب كا هيَنان ئاو ثيَ ن ك و ب َ س َ ماو جياو ب ثشت ب ستن ك َ ك ن و ما ِ ست ياخ ب و ب ه لَ ب َ مانط كان 1,6و,07و ب ب ه لَ ِوو ك ك ثيَ ن ك و ب ه َ ب و ب ه لَم ل ط َ س ضاو كشك ِوو ك ( )Kcب َ ه ي ك يا ل ماو ه َ كا 2
ث خت
ك ن ك .ب ت ين( )WUEت َ ما ك و ل مانط 07ل ب ك ج َ ل يَ َ ب و ب س ئ و ن ت .ب ت ين Etcل يَ كا يط ثان I2كا يط
كا يط
I3ب اَ ل كان
I1ل مانط ,1ل ه
وو
ش يَن I2وI3ل ه وو ناوض ك .كا يط ناوض ك ,نزمت ين Etcت َ ما ك و ل يَ كا يط ه ب و ب َ خ س َ ت س و يي كا و خ س َت ب ه م ي كا ,و ك و تا كا يط تاك ثيَط يين ل 07%ط َ ك ,LAI,TLNOماو ط ش ل ضان ن و تاك 07%ط َ ك ن ويَ َ ,ه و ها لي ن كا ِ /وو ك,ب ه م باي َ ل َ ج ,ب ه م ف ي َ ل َ ,ما ووشك و ك ب ويَن ,ك َ ك ن و ما ك و ب َ ه ي ك ل ط اَ,ق ,ط َ ِ ,ط ِ ,يَ ه َ كا ينط يي كا ل كان ِ ط/ق ب يَ يي ماو ط ش ك .كا يط ِووب ط اَ و ِ يَ َ ت ب و ل َو ب ئ و خاس َ تان ك ل ت يَ ين و ك هات و . و تا ثان كا يط
3
