project report submitted to the compatible

80
“EFFECT OF LOW MOISTURE STRESS ON MORPHO- PHYSIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS AND YIELD RESPONSES OF TWO PULSE CULTIVARS” Project report submitted to the Department of Environmental Science School of Science and Technology Tezpur University For the partial fulfilment of the degree Master of Science In Environmental Science Submitted by- Velentina Das MSc.4 th semester Roll No: ESE10010 Department of Environmental science Tezpur University 1

Upload: velentina-das

Post on 15-Apr-2017

539 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Project report submitted to the compatible

ldquoEFFECT OF LOW MOISTURE STRESS ON MORPHO-PHYSIOLOGICAL CHARACTERS AND YIELD RESPONSES

OF TWO PULSE CULTIVARSrdquo

Project report submitted to the

Department of Environmental Science

School of Science and Technology

Tezpur University

For the partial fulfilment of the degree

Master of ScienceIn

Environmental Science

Submitted by-Velentina Das

MSc4th semesterRoll No ESE10010

Department of Environmental scienceTezpur University

TezpurAssam

1

Department of Environmental Science

Tezpur University

This is to certify that the project report entitled ldquoEffect of Low-Moisture Stress on Morpho-

physiological Parameters and Yield Responses of two Pulses Cultivarsrdquo submitted to the

department of Environmental Science Tezpur University for the partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science is a

record of original work done by Ms Velentina Das under the supervision of Dr(Mrs) Nirmali Gogoi

in the Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

Head of the Department Supervisor(Dr RR Hoque) (Dr Nirmali Gogoi)

2

Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

I Velentina Das hereby declare that the project report entitled ldquoEffect of low moisture stress on Morpho-physiological Parameters and Yield Responses of Two Pulse Cultivarsrdquo submitted to Tezpur University in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science is a record of original work done during the autumn semester 2011 in the department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

3

Velentina Das

I at the very onset would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my Supervisor DrNirmali

Gogoi marsquoam Assistant Professor Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University for

providing ample of support valuable suggestion guidance and encouragement and cooperation at all

stages of my Project work She being an ideal person was always been my inspiration in every step

I offer my sincere thanks and gratitude to Professor KKBaruah Sir Tezpur University for his awful

lectures delivered in the regular classes which made me know my Project Topic more familiar before

head And along with his constant assistance suggestions guidance and co-operation and

encouragement during the entire course of project work

I would like to take the opportunity to thank and express my gratefulness to Dr KP Sarma Sir for

his guidance and providing me all the necessary fulfilments for the completion of the project work

I also convey my cordial thanks to DrRRHoque sir Head of the Department Department of

Environmental Science Tezpur University for giving me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful

project which not only helped me in doing a lot of Research but I explored many such events which

has been confined only to book and my limit of understanding was all based on theoretical

perspectives But after this project I could rather say that what I have gained is no more theoretical

now All I know is now practical

I also express and deliver my heartfelt Thanks to all the other Faculty members of Department of

Environmental Science- DrAKDas sir DrAshalata Devi marsquoam DrSSBhattacharya sir

4

DrMKumar sir Sumi Handique marsquoam for kind help and co-operation and encouragement during

the entire course of Project work

I would like to give my heartiest Thanks to Ms Bhaswatee Baroowa (Research Scholar) for being so

kind and helpful all throughout my Project She has been with me just like my elder sister in all phase

and makes me homely and giving moral support in every step

I express my cordial Thanks to my other Research Scholars who been giving constant advice

valuable suggestions and co-operation

Lastly but not least I would also like to thank my Parents My Local Guardian Dipankar Kalita

Department of Food Processing Technology Tezpur University and all my class-mate My Hostel

mates and my Roommate for being so humble and kind and along with helped me a lot in finishing

this project within the limited time

I am making this project not only for marks and partial fulfilment of the syllabus but its and handy

full aid to increase my knowledge and enlarge the circumference of my thoughts in every field

ldquoTHANKS AGAIN TO ALL WHO HELPED MErdquo

Abstract

Scarcity of water is a severe environmental constraint to plant productivity Drought-induced

loss in crop yield probably exceeds losses from all other causes since both the severity and

duration of the stress are critical Crop growth and productivity is adversely affected by

naturersquos wrath in the form of various biotic and abiotic stresses which adversely affects crop

growth and yield Therefore the present study was conducted with two major pulse crops

green gram (Vigna radiata L) and black gram (Vigna mungo L) in the sight to gain

information on various physiological changes taking place in the plants under low moisture

stress and its subsequent relation to plant growth development and yield Positive correlation

was found in plant height and leaf number and leaf area in both the pulses Regarding yield

both the pulses showed positive correlation with respect to soil moisture content The study

revealed that C1(T9) black gram is resistant than green gram against short-term moisture

stress And further it could be find out that the C3 (Pratap) of green gram has severe impact

on the moisture stress

5

Keywords Crop growth Water deficiet Plant growth Morpho-physiological parameters

Yield responses

ContentsPage No

Chapter-1 Introduction 1-3

Chapter-2 Review of Literature 4-13

Chapter-3 Methods and Methodology 14-23

31 Experimental site 14-15

32 Preparation of soil beds 16

33 Experimental Design 16

34 Soil Analysis 16

341 Bulk density 17

342 Soil pH17

343 Soil Conductivity17

344 Moisture or Water content18

6

345 Soil Water holding Capacity19

346 Determination of available nitrogen in soil20-22

35 Plant Morphological Parameters22

36 Yield Parameters22-23

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions24-34

Chapter5 Conclusions35

Chapter6 References36-42

List of tables Page NoTable1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil 24Table2 Soil moisture content of Black gram 25Table3 Soil moisture content of Green gram 25Table4 Plant height of Black gram 26Table5 Plant height of Green gram26Table6 Leaf number of Black gram 27Table7 Leaf number of Green gram 27

7

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 2: Project report submitted to the compatible

Department of Environmental Science

Tezpur University

This is to certify that the project report entitled ldquoEffect of Low-Moisture Stress on Morpho-

physiological Parameters and Yield Responses of two Pulses Cultivarsrdquo submitted to the

department of Environmental Science Tezpur University for the partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science is a

record of original work done by Ms Velentina Das under the supervision of Dr(Mrs) Nirmali Gogoi

in the Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

Head of the Department Supervisor(Dr RR Hoque) (Dr Nirmali Gogoi)

2

Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

I Velentina Das hereby declare that the project report entitled ldquoEffect of low moisture stress on Morpho-physiological Parameters and Yield Responses of Two Pulse Cultivarsrdquo submitted to Tezpur University in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science is a record of original work done during the autumn semester 2011 in the department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

3

Velentina Das

I at the very onset would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my Supervisor DrNirmali

Gogoi marsquoam Assistant Professor Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University for

providing ample of support valuable suggestion guidance and encouragement and cooperation at all

stages of my Project work She being an ideal person was always been my inspiration in every step

I offer my sincere thanks and gratitude to Professor KKBaruah Sir Tezpur University for his awful

lectures delivered in the regular classes which made me know my Project Topic more familiar before

head And along with his constant assistance suggestions guidance and co-operation and

encouragement during the entire course of project work

I would like to take the opportunity to thank and express my gratefulness to Dr KP Sarma Sir for

his guidance and providing me all the necessary fulfilments for the completion of the project work

I also convey my cordial thanks to DrRRHoque sir Head of the Department Department of

Environmental Science Tezpur University for giving me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful

project which not only helped me in doing a lot of Research but I explored many such events which

has been confined only to book and my limit of understanding was all based on theoretical

perspectives But after this project I could rather say that what I have gained is no more theoretical

now All I know is now practical

I also express and deliver my heartfelt Thanks to all the other Faculty members of Department of

Environmental Science- DrAKDas sir DrAshalata Devi marsquoam DrSSBhattacharya sir

4

DrMKumar sir Sumi Handique marsquoam for kind help and co-operation and encouragement during

the entire course of Project work

I would like to give my heartiest Thanks to Ms Bhaswatee Baroowa (Research Scholar) for being so

kind and helpful all throughout my Project She has been with me just like my elder sister in all phase

and makes me homely and giving moral support in every step

I express my cordial Thanks to my other Research Scholars who been giving constant advice

valuable suggestions and co-operation

Lastly but not least I would also like to thank my Parents My Local Guardian Dipankar Kalita

Department of Food Processing Technology Tezpur University and all my class-mate My Hostel

mates and my Roommate for being so humble and kind and along with helped me a lot in finishing

this project within the limited time

I am making this project not only for marks and partial fulfilment of the syllabus but its and handy

full aid to increase my knowledge and enlarge the circumference of my thoughts in every field

ldquoTHANKS AGAIN TO ALL WHO HELPED MErdquo

Abstract

Scarcity of water is a severe environmental constraint to plant productivity Drought-induced

loss in crop yield probably exceeds losses from all other causes since both the severity and

duration of the stress are critical Crop growth and productivity is adversely affected by

naturersquos wrath in the form of various biotic and abiotic stresses which adversely affects crop

growth and yield Therefore the present study was conducted with two major pulse crops

green gram (Vigna radiata L) and black gram (Vigna mungo L) in the sight to gain

information on various physiological changes taking place in the plants under low moisture

stress and its subsequent relation to plant growth development and yield Positive correlation

was found in plant height and leaf number and leaf area in both the pulses Regarding yield

both the pulses showed positive correlation with respect to soil moisture content The study

revealed that C1(T9) black gram is resistant than green gram against short-term moisture

stress And further it could be find out that the C3 (Pratap) of green gram has severe impact

on the moisture stress

5

Keywords Crop growth Water deficiet Plant growth Morpho-physiological parameters

Yield responses

ContentsPage No

Chapter-1 Introduction 1-3

Chapter-2 Review of Literature 4-13

Chapter-3 Methods and Methodology 14-23

31 Experimental site 14-15

32 Preparation of soil beds 16

33 Experimental Design 16

34 Soil Analysis 16

341 Bulk density 17

342 Soil pH17

343 Soil Conductivity17

344 Moisture or Water content18

6

345 Soil Water holding Capacity19

346 Determination of available nitrogen in soil20-22

35 Plant Morphological Parameters22

36 Yield Parameters22-23

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions24-34

Chapter5 Conclusions35

Chapter6 References36-42

List of tables Page NoTable1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil 24Table2 Soil moisture content of Black gram 25Table3 Soil moisture content of Green gram 25Table4 Plant height of Black gram 26Table5 Plant height of Green gram26Table6 Leaf number of Black gram 27Table7 Leaf number of Green gram 27

7

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 3: Project report submitted to the compatible

Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

I Velentina Das hereby declare that the project report entitled ldquoEffect of low moisture stress on Morpho-physiological Parameters and Yield Responses of Two Pulse Cultivarsrdquo submitted to Tezpur University in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of the degree of Master of Science in Environmental Science is a record of original work done during the autumn semester 2011 in the department of Environmental Science Tezpur University Assam

3

Velentina Das

I at the very onset would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my Supervisor DrNirmali

Gogoi marsquoam Assistant Professor Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University for

providing ample of support valuable suggestion guidance and encouragement and cooperation at all

stages of my Project work She being an ideal person was always been my inspiration in every step

I offer my sincere thanks and gratitude to Professor KKBaruah Sir Tezpur University for his awful

lectures delivered in the regular classes which made me know my Project Topic more familiar before

head And along with his constant assistance suggestions guidance and co-operation and

encouragement during the entire course of project work

I would like to take the opportunity to thank and express my gratefulness to Dr KP Sarma Sir for

his guidance and providing me all the necessary fulfilments for the completion of the project work

I also convey my cordial thanks to DrRRHoque sir Head of the Department Department of

Environmental Science Tezpur University for giving me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful

project which not only helped me in doing a lot of Research but I explored many such events which

has been confined only to book and my limit of understanding was all based on theoretical

perspectives But after this project I could rather say that what I have gained is no more theoretical

now All I know is now practical

I also express and deliver my heartfelt Thanks to all the other Faculty members of Department of

Environmental Science- DrAKDas sir DrAshalata Devi marsquoam DrSSBhattacharya sir

4

DrMKumar sir Sumi Handique marsquoam for kind help and co-operation and encouragement during

the entire course of Project work

I would like to give my heartiest Thanks to Ms Bhaswatee Baroowa (Research Scholar) for being so

kind and helpful all throughout my Project She has been with me just like my elder sister in all phase

and makes me homely and giving moral support in every step

I express my cordial Thanks to my other Research Scholars who been giving constant advice

valuable suggestions and co-operation

Lastly but not least I would also like to thank my Parents My Local Guardian Dipankar Kalita

Department of Food Processing Technology Tezpur University and all my class-mate My Hostel

mates and my Roommate for being so humble and kind and along with helped me a lot in finishing

this project within the limited time

I am making this project not only for marks and partial fulfilment of the syllabus but its and handy

full aid to increase my knowledge and enlarge the circumference of my thoughts in every field

ldquoTHANKS AGAIN TO ALL WHO HELPED MErdquo

Abstract

Scarcity of water is a severe environmental constraint to plant productivity Drought-induced

loss in crop yield probably exceeds losses from all other causes since both the severity and

duration of the stress are critical Crop growth and productivity is adversely affected by

naturersquos wrath in the form of various biotic and abiotic stresses which adversely affects crop

growth and yield Therefore the present study was conducted with two major pulse crops

green gram (Vigna radiata L) and black gram (Vigna mungo L) in the sight to gain

information on various physiological changes taking place in the plants under low moisture

stress and its subsequent relation to plant growth development and yield Positive correlation

was found in plant height and leaf number and leaf area in both the pulses Regarding yield

both the pulses showed positive correlation with respect to soil moisture content The study

revealed that C1(T9) black gram is resistant than green gram against short-term moisture

stress And further it could be find out that the C3 (Pratap) of green gram has severe impact

on the moisture stress

5

Keywords Crop growth Water deficiet Plant growth Morpho-physiological parameters

Yield responses

ContentsPage No

Chapter-1 Introduction 1-3

Chapter-2 Review of Literature 4-13

Chapter-3 Methods and Methodology 14-23

31 Experimental site 14-15

32 Preparation of soil beds 16

33 Experimental Design 16

34 Soil Analysis 16

341 Bulk density 17

342 Soil pH17

343 Soil Conductivity17

344 Moisture or Water content18

6

345 Soil Water holding Capacity19

346 Determination of available nitrogen in soil20-22

35 Plant Morphological Parameters22

36 Yield Parameters22-23

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions24-34

Chapter5 Conclusions35

Chapter6 References36-42

List of tables Page NoTable1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil 24Table2 Soil moisture content of Black gram 25Table3 Soil moisture content of Green gram 25Table4 Plant height of Black gram 26Table5 Plant height of Green gram26Table6 Leaf number of Black gram 27Table7 Leaf number of Green gram 27

7

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 4: Project report submitted to the compatible

Velentina Das

I at the very onset would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my Supervisor DrNirmali

Gogoi marsquoam Assistant Professor Department of Environmental Science Tezpur University for

providing ample of support valuable suggestion guidance and encouragement and cooperation at all

stages of my Project work She being an ideal person was always been my inspiration in every step

I offer my sincere thanks and gratitude to Professor KKBaruah Sir Tezpur University for his awful

lectures delivered in the regular classes which made me know my Project Topic more familiar before

head And along with his constant assistance suggestions guidance and co-operation and

encouragement during the entire course of project work

I would like to take the opportunity to thank and express my gratefulness to Dr KP Sarma Sir for

his guidance and providing me all the necessary fulfilments for the completion of the project work

I also convey my cordial thanks to DrRRHoque sir Head of the Department Department of

Environmental Science Tezpur University for giving me the golden opportunity to do this wonderful

project which not only helped me in doing a lot of Research but I explored many such events which

has been confined only to book and my limit of understanding was all based on theoretical

perspectives But after this project I could rather say that what I have gained is no more theoretical

now All I know is now practical

I also express and deliver my heartfelt Thanks to all the other Faculty members of Department of

Environmental Science- DrAKDas sir DrAshalata Devi marsquoam DrSSBhattacharya sir

4

DrMKumar sir Sumi Handique marsquoam for kind help and co-operation and encouragement during

the entire course of Project work

I would like to give my heartiest Thanks to Ms Bhaswatee Baroowa (Research Scholar) for being so

kind and helpful all throughout my Project She has been with me just like my elder sister in all phase

and makes me homely and giving moral support in every step

I express my cordial Thanks to my other Research Scholars who been giving constant advice

valuable suggestions and co-operation

Lastly but not least I would also like to thank my Parents My Local Guardian Dipankar Kalita

Department of Food Processing Technology Tezpur University and all my class-mate My Hostel

mates and my Roommate for being so humble and kind and along with helped me a lot in finishing

this project within the limited time

I am making this project not only for marks and partial fulfilment of the syllabus but its and handy

full aid to increase my knowledge and enlarge the circumference of my thoughts in every field

ldquoTHANKS AGAIN TO ALL WHO HELPED MErdquo

Abstract

Scarcity of water is a severe environmental constraint to plant productivity Drought-induced

loss in crop yield probably exceeds losses from all other causes since both the severity and

duration of the stress are critical Crop growth and productivity is adversely affected by

naturersquos wrath in the form of various biotic and abiotic stresses which adversely affects crop

growth and yield Therefore the present study was conducted with two major pulse crops

green gram (Vigna radiata L) and black gram (Vigna mungo L) in the sight to gain

information on various physiological changes taking place in the plants under low moisture

stress and its subsequent relation to plant growth development and yield Positive correlation

was found in plant height and leaf number and leaf area in both the pulses Regarding yield

both the pulses showed positive correlation with respect to soil moisture content The study

revealed that C1(T9) black gram is resistant than green gram against short-term moisture

stress And further it could be find out that the C3 (Pratap) of green gram has severe impact

on the moisture stress

5

Keywords Crop growth Water deficiet Plant growth Morpho-physiological parameters

Yield responses

ContentsPage No

Chapter-1 Introduction 1-3

Chapter-2 Review of Literature 4-13

Chapter-3 Methods and Methodology 14-23

31 Experimental site 14-15

32 Preparation of soil beds 16

33 Experimental Design 16

34 Soil Analysis 16

341 Bulk density 17

342 Soil pH17

343 Soil Conductivity17

344 Moisture or Water content18

6

345 Soil Water holding Capacity19

346 Determination of available nitrogen in soil20-22

35 Plant Morphological Parameters22

36 Yield Parameters22-23

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions24-34

Chapter5 Conclusions35

Chapter6 References36-42

List of tables Page NoTable1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil 24Table2 Soil moisture content of Black gram 25Table3 Soil moisture content of Green gram 25Table4 Plant height of Black gram 26Table5 Plant height of Green gram26Table6 Leaf number of Black gram 27Table7 Leaf number of Green gram 27

7

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 5: Project report submitted to the compatible

DrMKumar sir Sumi Handique marsquoam for kind help and co-operation and encouragement during

the entire course of Project work

I would like to give my heartiest Thanks to Ms Bhaswatee Baroowa (Research Scholar) for being so

kind and helpful all throughout my Project She has been with me just like my elder sister in all phase

and makes me homely and giving moral support in every step

I express my cordial Thanks to my other Research Scholars who been giving constant advice

valuable suggestions and co-operation

Lastly but not least I would also like to thank my Parents My Local Guardian Dipankar Kalita

Department of Food Processing Technology Tezpur University and all my class-mate My Hostel

mates and my Roommate for being so humble and kind and along with helped me a lot in finishing

this project within the limited time

I am making this project not only for marks and partial fulfilment of the syllabus but its and handy

full aid to increase my knowledge and enlarge the circumference of my thoughts in every field

ldquoTHANKS AGAIN TO ALL WHO HELPED MErdquo

Abstract

Scarcity of water is a severe environmental constraint to plant productivity Drought-induced

loss in crop yield probably exceeds losses from all other causes since both the severity and

duration of the stress are critical Crop growth and productivity is adversely affected by

naturersquos wrath in the form of various biotic and abiotic stresses which adversely affects crop

growth and yield Therefore the present study was conducted with two major pulse crops

green gram (Vigna radiata L) and black gram (Vigna mungo L) in the sight to gain

information on various physiological changes taking place in the plants under low moisture

stress and its subsequent relation to plant growth development and yield Positive correlation

was found in plant height and leaf number and leaf area in both the pulses Regarding yield

both the pulses showed positive correlation with respect to soil moisture content The study

revealed that C1(T9) black gram is resistant than green gram against short-term moisture

stress And further it could be find out that the C3 (Pratap) of green gram has severe impact

on the moisture stress

5

Keywords Crop growth Water deficiet Plant growth Morpho-physiological parameters

Yield responses

ContentsPage No

Chapter-1 Introduction 1-3

Chapter-2 Review of Literature 4-13

Chapter-3 Methods and Methodology 14-23

31 Experimental site 14-15

32 Preparation of soil beds 16

33 Experimental Design 16

34 Soil Analysis 16

341 Bulk density 17

342 Soil pH17

343 Soil Conductivity17

344 Moisture or Water content18

6

345 Soil Water holding Capacity19

346 Determination of available nitrogen in soil20-22

35 Plant Morphological Parameters22

36 Yield Parameters22-23

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions24-34

Chapter5 Conclusions35

Chapter6 References36-42

List of tables Page NoTable1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil 24Table2 Soil moisture content of Black gram 25Table3 Soil moisture content of Green gram 25Table4 Plant height of Black gram 26Table5 Plant height of Green gram26Table6 Leaf number of Black gram 27Table7 Leaf number of Green gram 27

7

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 6: Project report submitted to the compatible

Keywords Crop growth Water deficiet Plant growth Morpho-physiological parameters

Yield responses

ContentsPage No

Chapter-1 Introduction 1-3

Chapter-2 Review of Literature 4-13

Chapter-3 Methods and Methodology 14-23

31 Experimental site 14-15

32 Preparation of soil beds 16

33 Experimental Design 16

34 Soil Analysis 16

341 Bulk density 17

342 Soil pH17

343 Soil Conductivity17

344 Moisture or Water content18

6

345 Soil Water holding Capacity19

346 Determination of available nitrogen in soil20-22

35 Plant Morphological Parameters22

36 Yield Parameters22-23

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions24-34

Chapter5 Conclusions35

Chapter6 References36-42

List of tables Page NoTable1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil 24Table2 Soil moisture content of Black gram 25Table3 Soil moisture content of Green gram 25Table4 Plant height of Black gram 26Table5 Plant height of Green gram26Table6 Leaf number of Black gram 27Table7 Leaf number of Green gram 27

7

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 7: Project report submitted to the compatible

345 Soil Water holding Capacity19

346 Determination of available nitrogen in soil20-22

35 Plant Morphological Parameters22

36 Yield Parameters22-23

Chapter 4 Results and Discussions24-34

Chapter5 Conclusions35

Chapter6 References36-42

List of tables Page NoTable1 Physico-chemical parameters of soil 24Table2 Soil moisture content of Black gram 25Table3 Soil moisture content of Green gram 25Table4 Plant height of Black gram 26Table5 Plant height of Green gram26Table6 Leaf number of Black gram 27Table7 Leaf number of Green gram 27

7

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 8: Project report submitted to the compatible

Table8 Leaf area of Black gram 28Table 9 Leaf area of Green gram28Table10 Pod number of Black gram28Table11 Pod number of Green gram29Table12 Yield in terms of GY DSI TDS MP RP of both the pulses29Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition29

List of figures Page NoFig 1 Preparation of soil beds14Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters14

8

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 9: Project report submitted to the compatible

Fig 3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam15Fig 4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses30Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of both the pulses 31Fig 6 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area of both the pulses 32Fig 7(a) Effect of low moisture stress on Crop yield 33Fig 7(b) Effect of low moisture stress on Geometrical Yield 33Fig 8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on mean productivity 34Fig8 (a) Effect of low moisture stress on rate productivity 34

9

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 10: Project report submitted to the compatible

Chapter-1Introduction

lsquoIn a world that has the means for feeding its population the persistence of hunger is a

scandalrsquo (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) This is a very comprehensive statement

made by the United Nations Organization and clearly explains the present state of apathy of

world agriculture While plant physiological investigations provide knowledge and better

understanding of the effects of abiotic stress on plants crop physiology provides information

on how stress affects plant growth and eventually agricultural yield Growing global demand

for food and feed of various plant-based products climatic change-imposed stress on

agriculture and the new opportunities such as the advances in molecular biology are covered

in this chapter Stress is an altered physiological condition caused by factors that tend to

disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any physical and chemical change produced by a stress

(Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is used with various meanings the physiological

definition and appropriate term as responses in different situations The flexibility of normal

metabolism allows the response initiation to the environmental changes which fluctuate

regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal cycles Thus every deviation of a factor

from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress Stress being a constraint or highly

unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular metabolic patterns cause injury disease or

aberrant physiology The extent of crop yield loss due to abiotic stresses can be reduced by

manipulating plant metabolism and use of genetically-engineered plants This chapter

provides readers with a broad overview of the various types of abiotic stresses and their

influence on the yields of economically important crops such as cereals grain legumes

vegetable crops oilseed crops forage crops and medicinal crops (Rai and Takabe

2006)Abiotic stress such as drought flood problem soils (salinity and alkalinity) extreme

temperatures (especially at flowering and maturity times) chemical toxicity and oxidative

stress are serious threats to agriculture and the environment Increased salinity of arable land

is expected to have devastating global effects resulting in 30 land loss within the next 25

years and up to 50 by the year 2050 (Food and Agriculture Organization 2006) Stress in

10

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 11: Project report submitted to the compatible

biological terms means deviation in the normal physiology development and function of

plants which can be injurious and can inflict irreversible damage to the plant system

The type of stress that crop plants suffer from can be broadly grouped as lsquotemperature

variation at crucial stagesrsquo

There are several sticky abiotic parameters revolving around temperature eg frost damage

and evaporation stress Many living organisms parasitize plants such as the plant pathogenic

viruses bacteria fungi nematodes insects and phenerogamic plants Abiotic stresses are

inflicted by non-living things matter on which the plant system is dependent Ambient

temperature relative humidity sunshine microclimate soil nutrition soil biota and other

physico-chemical properties of the soil create stress on plant Stress is an altered

physiological condition caused by factors that tend to disrupt the equilibrium Strain is any

physical and chemical change produced by a stress (Gaspar et al 2002) The term stress is

used with various meanings the physiological definition and appropriate term as responses in

different situations The flexibility of normal metabolism allows the response initiation to the

environmental changes which fluctuate regularly and are predictable over daily and seasonal

cycles Thus every deviation of a factor from its optimum does not necessarily result in stress

Stress being a constraint or highly unpredictable fluctuations imposed on regular

metabolic patterns cause injury disease or aberrant physiology Plants are frequently exposed

to many stresses such as drought low temperature salt flooding heat oxidative stress and

heavy metal toxicity while growing in nature Drought is a meteorological term and is

commonly defined as a period without significant rainfall Generally drought stress occurs

when the available water in the soil is reduced and atmospheric conditions cause continuous

loss of water by transpiration or evaporation Drought stress tolerance is seen in almost all

plants but its extent varies from species to species and even within species

The severity of drought is unpredictable as it depends on many factors such as occurrence and distribution of rainfall evaporative demands and moisture storing capacity of soils (Wery et al 1994)

There are three types of drought-

Meteorological drought- Drought occurs when there is a prolonged period of below

average precipitation creating a natural shortage of available water

11

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 12: Project report submitted to the compatible

Agricultural drought- Drought occurs when there isnrsquot enough moisture to support

average crop production on farms or average grass production on range land

Although agricultural drought often occurs during periods of average precipitation

when soil conditions or agricultural techniques require extra water

Hydrological drought- This type of drought occurs when water reserves in aquifers

lakes etc fall below an established statistical average

Of the various stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to

crop production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed

germination to plant maturation so degree of water is essential at every stage of plant

growthIts effect on growth and yield of different crops has been studied during the

last few years The drought environment has been reported to limit plant growth and

development prior to the loss of productivity especially of crop species

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The present investigation was undertaken with the following objectives

To see the effect of low moisture stress on the important morpho-physiological

parameters of two popular pulses black gram (Vigna mungo L) and green gram

(Vigna radiata L) cultivars commonly grown in Assam

To see how these parameters changes in the recovery period of low moisture stress

To find out the overall effect of low moisture stress on yield components of these

two cultivars of pulses

12

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 13: Project report submitted to the compatible

Chapter-2Review of Literature

Of various abiotic stresses known in nature drought stress poses a major threat to crop

production because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to

plant maturation (Chaves et al 2003 Athar and Ashraf 2005) so any degree of water

imbalance may produce deleterious effects on crop growth but it depends upon the nature of

crop species (El-Far and Allan 1995)Plantrsquos behaviour responses to drought are complex

and they adopted different mechanisms when encounter drought (Jones 2004) Upon

exposure to water deficit plants exhibit physiological biochemical and molecular responses

at both the cellular and whole plant levels (Greenway and Munns 1980 Hasegawa et al

2000) To cope with drought stress plants respond with morphological physiological and

biochemical changes These changes aim at the retention of water in spite of the high external

osmoticum and the maintenance of photosynthetic activity while stomatal opening is reduced

to counter water loss Long ago Turner (1979) described some mechanisms of water stress

tolerance in plants such as drought escape avoidance and tolerance to low water potential In

fact all these plant strategies depend on certain specific plant adaptations to water deficit

conditions (Turner 1979 1982 Chaves et al 2003) Under stress conditions plant cells

have the ability to prevent water loss and to maintain the continuous growth Plants

commonly react to these stresses by accumulation of compatible solutes such as proline in

cells which results in the improvement of environmental stress tolerance (Hong et al 2000

Ramajulu amp Sudhakar 2001 Ashraf and Foolad 2007) These solutes can be accumulated in

high concentrations without impairing plant metabolisms The accumulation of these

osmolytes may help plants to tolerate against stress by improving their ability to maintain

osmotic balance within the cell (Hasegawa et al 2000 Apse and Blumwald 2002) The

maintenance of turgor by osmotic adjustment is an importance of physiological adaptations

for minimizing the detrimental effects of water stress (Munns 2002)Water Deficiet Stress-

is one of the abiotic stresses that plants encounter between seedling to harvest stage When

soil moisture is continuously low water extraction by root and water transport within the

13

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 14: Project report submitted to the compatible

plant is reduced and a drought like situation prevails To overcome drought stress plants

respond by increasing the water extraction efficiency and the water use efficiency of roots

and simultaneously reduce the transpiration rate The first plant-stress symptom induced by

drought is often a rapid inhibition of shoot and to a lesser extent root growth (Hsiao 1973

Schulze 1986) In general shoot growth is more sensitive to water deficit than root growth

(Sharp and Davies 1989) The mechanisms underlying the sustained root growth under

water stress include osmotic adjustment (Saab 1992) and an increase in the loosening

capacity of the cell wall (Hsiao and Xu 2000) Plant growth is the result of daughter-cell

production by meristematic cell divisions and subsequent massive expansion of the young

cells Cell expansion is in turn dependent on biophysical changes which include a regulated

loosening of primary cell walls and subsequent yielding to the hydrostatic (turgor) pressure

generated by solute and water uptake into the cells (Neumann 1995 Cosgrove 1997) Cell

growth rate and its inhibition by water deficit are regulated by a complex multigenic series of

metabolic processes and are not simply a function of water availability for turgor

maintenance (Bassani et al 2004 Fan and Neumann 2004 Achard et al 2006 Fan et al

2006 Ma and Bohnert 2007 Smith and Stitt 2007)

Drought is the most important constraint to chickpea yield accounting for 40ndash50 yield

reduction globally (Chaves et al 2003 Athar amp Ashraf 2005) it was observed that four

approaches are being pursued by the chickpea plants to overcome the drought stress

bull High root mass

bull Smaller leaf area

bull Osmotic adjustment

bull Early-maturing short-duration varieties

bull Capacity of root to extract moisture from lower soil strata

bull Reduced evapo-transpiration

bull Elasticity of root system so that when soil cracks roots do not get clipped-off

bull Ideal maturity period

14

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 15: Project report submitted to the compatible

bull Self-created soil mulch

21Effects of drought stress on Plant Morpho- physiological Parameters

211 Effect on Plant height

In soybean the stem length was decreased under water deficit conditions (Specht et al

2001) The plant height was reduced up to 25 in water stressed citrus seedlings (Wu et al

2008) Stem length was significantly affected under water stress in potato (Heuer amp Nadler

1995) Abelmoschus esculentus (Sankar et al 2007 amp 08) Vigna unguiculata (Manivannan

et al 2007a) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum) (Petropoulos

et al 2008) Water stress greatly suppresses cell expansion and cell growth due to the low

turgor pressure

Osmotic regulation can enable the maintenance of cell turgor for survival or to assist plant

growth under severe drought conditions in pearl millet (Shao et al 2008) The reduction in

plant height was associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more associated with

leaf senescence in A esculentus under water stress (Bhatt and Srinivasa Rao 2005) Water

stress reduced the head diameter 100- achene weight and yield per plant in sunflower There

was a negative correlation of head diameter with fresh root and shoot weight while a positive

one between dry shoot weight and achene yield per plant under water stress (Tahir and

Mehid 2001) Water stress for longer than 12 days at grain filling and flowering stage of

sunflower (grown in sandy loam soil) was the most damaging in reducing the achene yield in

sunflower (Mozaffari et al 1996 Reddy et al 2004) seed yield in common bean and green

gram (Webber et al 2006) maize (Monneveux et al 2006) and Petroselinum crispum

(Petropoulos et al 2008)Plant growth is greatly affected by water deficit At a

morphological level the shoot and root are the most affected and both are the key

components of plant adaptation to drought Plants generally limit the number and area of

leaves in response to drought stress just to cut down the water budget at the cost of yield loss

(Schuppler et al 1998) Greater plant fresh and dry weights under water limited conditions

are desirable characters

15

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 16: Project report submitted to the compatible

A common adverse effect of water stress on crop plants is the reduction in fresh and dry

biomass production (Farooq et al 2009) Plant productivity under drought stress is strongly

related to the processes of dry matter partitioning and temporal biomass distribution (Kage et

al 2004) Diminished biomass due to water stress was observed in almost all genotypes of

sunflower (Tahir and Mehid 2001)

Mild water stress affected the shoot dry weight while shoot dry weight was greater than root

dry weight loss under severe stress in sugar beet genotypes (Mohammadian et al 2005)

Reduced biomass was seen in water stressed soybean (Specht et al 2001) Poncirus

trifoliatae seedlings (Wu et al 2008) common bean and green gram (Webber et al 2006)

and Petroselinum crispum (Petropoulos et al 2008) A moderate stress tolerance in terms of

shoot dry mass plants was noticed in rice (Lafitte et al 2007)Impaired mitosis cell

elongation and expansion result in reduced plant height growth under drought (Nonami

1998 Kaya et al 2006 Hussain et al 2008)Water stress has been found to reduce greatly

the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al 1996 Mitchel et a 1997)

212 Effect on leaf area

Water stress induced reductions in growth and yield of several grain legumes are associated

with reductions in leaf area (Pandey et al 1984) Reduction in the average leaf size during

development occurs because later produced leaves are smaller while the older leaves that

abscise are larger Since leaf abscission increases under water stress a more uniform leaf size

during crop development with reductions in leaf area due to smaller average leaf size It is a

common observation that when server water deficiet develops lower (older) leaves are

desiccated and die first so as to reduce leaf area and water requirement than upper (younger)

leaves (Lopez et al 1996)Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the

leaf areas in many species of plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang

et al 2004) and many other species (Farooq et al 2009) Significant inter-specific

differences between two sympatric Populus species were found in total number of leaves

total leaf area and total leaf biomass under drought stress (Wullschleger et al 2005) The leaf

growth was more sensitive to water stress in wheat than in maize (Sacks et al 1997) Vigna

unguiculata (Manivannan et al 2007a) and sunflower (Manivannan et al 2007b amp 2008)

In the faba bean the lower leaf area under water stress is largely due to reduced leaf

expansion with relatively minor effects on leaf area production and death ( Kara Manos

16

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 17: Project report submitted to the compatible

1978 Farah 1981)For many grain legumes leaf area development (leaf production and

expansion) is more sensitive to water stress than leaf abscission ( Muchow et al 1985)

Vegetative growth of soyabean mild water stress reduces leaf expansion to a greater extent

than leaf production with little apparent affect on leaf senescence Severe water stress

however reduces leaf area largely by accelerated leaf senescence (Muchow et al 1986)

A number of studies have shown significant interaction between genotypes and water levels

(Siddique etal2000 Atteya et al 2003) Siddique et al (2000) studied response of four

cultivar of wheat to the four water levels It was shown that performance of these cultivars

was not similar over water level Atteya et al (2003) also indicated that exposure of plants to

drought led to noticeable decrease in leaf water potential relative water content and osmotic

potential However rate of dry matter accumulation was much lower in drought sensitive

genotypes as compared to the drought tolerant genotypes This may be due to higher

accumulation of cytokinins under drought stress Rauf and Sadaqat (2007) showed significant

higher accumulation of cytokinins in drought tolerant genotypes of sunflower They also

showed significant effect of endogenous plant growth regulators on the dry matter

partitioning It has been established that drought stress is a very important limiting factor at

the initial phase of plant growth and establishment It affects both elongation and expansion

growth (Anjum et al 2003a Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao 2005 Kusaka et al 2005 Shao et al

2008) It has long been established that plants bearing small leaves are typical of xeric

environments Such plants withstand drought very well albeit their growth rate and biomass

are relatively low (Ball et al 1994) Leaf pubescence is a xeromorphic trait that helps protect

the leaves from excessive heat load Hairy leaves have reduced leaf temperatures and

transpiration (Sandquist and Ehleringer 2003) whilst inter- and intra-specific variation exists

for the presence of this trait Under high temperature and radiation stress increases the light

reflectance and minimizes water loss by increasing the boundary layer resistance to water

vapour movement away from the leaf surface Development of optimal leaf area is important

to photosynthesis and dry matter yield Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as

a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water stressed soybean

the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants (Specht et al

2001)Reducing the water content of plant resulted in a similar retardation in the time of leaf

emergence on the plants decline in their rate of growth and in their number (Shahid et al

1998)Various studies have indicated that water stress causes an inhibiting effect on the leaf

area of plants (Nielson et al 1998 Kawakami et al 2006 Guerrier et al 1990)

Muthechelian et al Franko et al (2006) have found direct relationships between each of

17

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 18: Project report submitted to the compatible

these growth parameters and the increasing rate of water stress Among the crops rice as a

submerged crop is probably more susceptible to drought stress than most other plant species

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006)

Under mild water stress situations leaf rolling reduces transpiration loss increases humidity

within the rolled leaf and thereby enables plants to withstand the prevailing harsh water

deficit stress conditions (Agarwal et al 2006)

213Effect on Root growth

In many succulents such as tomato potato celery etc the shallow spreading root system

quickly absorbs the small amount of water supplied by rain These ldquorain rootsrdquo develop

within few hours of shower mop-up the soil moisture and soon these roots dry out These

crops have an amazing ability to produce water absorbing fresh roots at a very high speed and

enable plants to overcome the water stress The aerial roots also absorb water from the

atmosphere under saturated relative humidity conditions or when there is a fine drizzle The

aerial roots of vanilla and orchids absorb water directly when misty conditions prevail

However the aerial roots produced by sorghum at the basal internodes are for reducing the

anaerobic stress under flooded conditions and serve as ldquobreathing rootsrdquo (Hasegawa et al 2000) Production of ramified root system under drought is important to above ground

dry mass and the plant species or decreased under pre-anthesis drought stress treatment in

wheat (Edward amp Wright 2008)Root profile and depth of plants change so to survive under

water deficit conditions Under upland conditions rice maize and sorghum have similar root

length density and water extraction patterns down to 60 cm depth (Levitt 1972) Below this

level water extraction by rice is insignificant and this is one of the reasons why rice is more

vulnerable to water stress compared to other crops Generally rice varieties with high root

length density tend to have high leaf water potential and delayed leaf senescence under water

deficit conditions Invariably rice cultivar with superior root length performs better under

water limiting conditions (Penna 2003 Reddy et al 2004 Agarwal et al 2006)Where repeated spells of transient drought occurs genotypes with larger root systems

tend to perform better Access to moist soil zone is accomplished by plants with maximum

rooting depth Species that have the capacity to establish roots in these lower moist soil layers

18

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 19: Project report submitted to the compatible

survive and contribute to plant population and community dynamics Since roots are the only

source to acquire water from soil the root growth its density proliferation and size are key

responses of plants to drought stress (Kavar et al 2007)

214 Effect on Plant reproductive Status

Male organelle development during meiosis in the microspore mother cells is extremely

vulnerable to water deficit conditions Water deficit adversely affects the development of

microspores or pollen grains causing pollen sterility Female fertility in contrast is relatively

unaffected by water stress at this stage The injury inflicted is apparently not by desiccation

of the reproductive tissue but as a consequence of water deficit in stems and leaves (Saini

1997) Stress-induced arrest of male gametophyte development is preceded by disturbances in

carbohydrate metabolism and distribution within anther An inhibition of the key sugar-

cleaving enzyme acid invertase decreases sugar delivery to reproductive tissues upon

inhibition of photosynthesis under stress conditions This is the signal that triggers metabolic

lesions leading to failure of male gametophyte development (Saini 1997)

215Effect on Fruit Development

In perennial fruit crops reduced moisture availability at flowering and fruit development

stages curtails pollen fertility berry formation and at subsequent stages causes fruit shedding

(Lindhauer et al 2007) Even fruits that eventually mature are of poor quality size and

appearance For example Vines nuts and melons produce unfilled fruits and nuts when

moisture stress occurs Early season water stress reduces the number of green leaves their

size shape and number of fresh leaves per flush In a row if annual cyclic water stress

occurs then it badly affects the canopy structure frame development number of branches

and the strength of twigs and woods

22 EFFECT ON PLANT YIELD COMPONENTS

The effects of water stress on growth and yield of different crops have been studied during

the last few years (Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga

et al 2003 Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004) The crop species

19

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 20: Project report submitted to the compatible

show great differences for final harvestable yield under drought stress in early plantings of

sunflower the yield increase was associated with both an increase in grain number and in

individual grain weight (Soriano et al 2002)Exposure of sunflower plants to drought stress

at bud initiation stage was more detrimental to seed and biological yield than at seed filling

stage (Prabhudeva et al 1998)Giunta et al (1993) find that wheat yield decreased from 25 -

85 under drought stress

In some other studies on maize drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation due to water stress during early reproductive growth

(Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean

usually as a result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001) In water

stressed soybean the seed yield was far below when compared to well-watered control plants

(Specht et al 2001) There is an inadequacy of experimental evidence to summarises that

moisture stress in early stages affects the final yield of annual crops

With the normal weather thereafter loss is compensated by increased number of grains per

spike and better grain weight (DeLucia et al 1989) Lazaridou et al (2003)When

brief periods of moisture stress occurs the growth loss imposed on the plant is overcome

subsequently by increasing the functional efficiency Though the scars of stress will be

measurable on the crop productivity the magnitude of loss gets substantially reduced Plant

varieties possessing such alternate mechanisms to minimize the loss inflicted by drought are

rated as lsquotolerantrsquo

Three main mechanisms reduce crop yield by soil water deficit (i) reduced canopy

absorption of photosynthetically active radiation (ii) decreased radiation-use efficiency and

(iii) reduced harvest index (Earl and Davis 2003) Although plant responses to drought are

relatively well known plant performance under a more complex environment where multiple

stresses co-occur is fragmentary Hsiao and Xu al 2001) Drought-induced yield reduction

has been reported in many crop species which depends upon the severity and duration of the

stress period In maize water stress reduced yield by delaying silking thus increasing the

anthesis-to-silking interval This trait was highly correlated with grain yield specifically ear

and kernel number per plant (Cattivelli et al 2008) In pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum)

co-mapping of the harvest index and panicle harvest index with grain yield revealed that

greater drought tolerance was achieved by greater partitioning of dry matter from stover to

grains (Yadav et al 2004)Under rainfed growing conditions seasonal fluctuations in water

availability may severely affect cereal grain yield during water deficient periods The most

suitable cultivar for such environments would produce high yields when rainfall is abundant

20

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 21: Project report submitted to the compatible

and without major yield reduction under rainfall shortages (Sinebo 2005)The extent of

variation in yield between stress and non stress conditions is widely accepted as a better

indicator of genotypic response to stress (Blum et al 1989)

Drought indices describing the relations between yield under stress and yield under

favourable conditions have been widely used (Golabadi et al 2006) These indices can be

used in the current study in identify potential tolerant andor high yielding cultivars suited to

drought prone growing conditions M Rashidil and K Seyfi (2007) conducted an experiment

on Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo) which is a very important vegetable crop of Iran to examine

the effect of drought stress on crop yield Water stress significantly affected crop yield of

cantaloupe in the order of 10 gt 30 gt 50 gt 70 available water deficit Highest crop

yield was obtained at 10 available water deficit and lowest value of crop yield was obtained

at 70 available water deficit treatment They concluded that higher value of crop yield

obtained at 10 available water deficit might be due to the more frequent application of

water resulting in more adequate moisture in active crop root zone sufficient moisture

conservation and better utilization of nutrients Lower crop yield obtained at 70 available

water deficit might be due to withdrawal of water application resulting in a lack of moisture

in active crop root zone inadequate moisture conservation and poor nutrient utilization

(Tahir amp Mehdi 2001 Aslam amp Tahir 2003 Ahmad et al 2003 Kumaga et al 2003

Hussain et al 2004 Khan et al 2004 Rahman et al 2004)Grain yield of single plant

decreases significantly with increasing severe drought stress and density Negative effect of

drought stress on yield component and grain in sunflower has been reported by other

researchers (Daulay et al 1983 Human et al 1998 Robinson et al 1985) Crop yield of

high osmotic-adjusting plants is more than that of low osmotic-adjusting plants Subbarao

Chauhan amp Johansen (2000) reported that osmotic adjustment was positively correlated with

grain yield It seems that the concentration and quality of cellular components is influenced

by severity of water deficit duration of recovery time and also by environmental conditions

such as different types of soil (Hoffman et al 2005 Ober et al 2005) It appears that the

drought stress-induced changes are reversible to some extent at least at the cellular level

Drought susceptibility index (S) represent drought tolerance at whole plant level regardless of

drought tolerance mechanism in operation (Grzesiak et al 1996 Vallejo and Kelly 1998)

The selected plants for lower drought susceptibility index may have diverse tolerance

mechanisms rather than based on single drought tolerant traits Therefore such type of

population may successfully cope with drought under range of environments Furthermore

drought tolerance is a complex phenomenon that does not always solely depend on single

21

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 22: Project report submitted to the compatible

plant trait Drought susceptibility index and fresh pod yield were independent of each other

and presence or absence of drought will establish their relationship (Falconer et al 1990)

In addition fresh pod yield of non-stress and drought condition should be considered as

separate resultant traits that were not always contributed by the same independent traits

(Falconer 1990) Similar type of relationship has also been obtained in other crops (Freres et

al 1989)Drought susceptibility of a genotype is often measured as a function of the

reduction in yield under drought stress (Blum 1988) whilst the values are confounded with

differential yield potential of genotypes (Ramirez and Kelly 1998) Rosielle and Hamblin

(1981) defined stress tolerance (TOL) as the differences in yield between the stress (Ys) and

non-stress (Yp) environments and mean productivity (MP) as the average yield of Ys and Yp

Fischer and Maurer (1978) proposed a stress susceptibility index (SSI) of the cultivar

Fernandez (1992) defined a new advanced index (STI= stress tolerance index) which can be

used to identify genotypes that produce high yield under both stress and non-stress

conditions Other yield based estimates of drought resistance are geometric mean (GM)

mean productivity (MP) and TOL The geometric mean is often used by breeders interested

in relative performance since drought stress can vary in severity in field environment over

years (Ramirez and Kelly 1998)Based on several studies (JLMaclagan 1993) proposed

that relative leaf water content can use as an index for rate of stress and wilting (Ritchie S

and T Henry 1990) in a study on two varieties of wheat used the relative leaf water content

as a stress index( Sullivan and JD Eastin 1994) proposed amount of electrolyte seepage in

plant leaves under stress condition (Winslow MD N Smirnoff 1984) showed that cell

membrane damage on plant which was under stress condition was lower than other

(RAFisher and R Maurer 1978) proposed stress susceptibility index to determine drought

tolerant variety Lower stress susceptibility index indicated higher toleration to drought The

selected varieties by this way have lower yield potential but in drought condition they will

produce higher yield (GCJ Fernandez 1993) proposed another index as a drought tolerance

index to determine drought tolerant variety Higher drought tolerance index show more

toleration to drought The variety that show higher drought tolerance index will produce

higher yield in stress and non stress condition (WA Iljin 1957)Among the stress

tolerance indicators a larger value of TOL and SSI represent relatively more sensitivity to

stress thus a smaller value of TOL and SSI are favoured In spring wheat cultivars Guttieri

et al (2001) using SSI criterion suggested that SSI more than 1 indicating above-average

susceptibility and SSI less than 1 indicated below-average susceptibility to drought stress

Ramirez and Kelly (1998) reported that GM and SSI as the mathematical derivations of the

22

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 23: Project report submitted to the compatible

same yield data selection based on a combination of both indices may provide a more

desirable criterion for improving drought resistance in common bean

Chapter-3Methods and methodologies

The experiment was carried out to evaluate the effect of short term moisture stress on some

important morpho-physiological parameters and yield components of the two popular pulses

black gram(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) which are commonly grown in

Assam

31Description of the experimental site-

The present experiment was carried out during the period of August to December 2011 at

Tezpur University Campus which is located in North bank plain zone of Assam (26o14ʹ) and

(92o50ʹ)The soil of the experimental site is characterised by sandy loam textured having

slightly acidic in nature The soil physicochemical properties of the experimental site was

evaluated and presented in table no1 as shown in the chapter 4 The maximum and minimum

average temperature recorded during the experimental period ranges from 205o C to 328o C

and the average rainfall recorded was 0248mmAnd the relative humidity is 50 to 80

23

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 24: Project report submitted to the compatible

Fig 1 Preparation of soil beds Fig 2 Study of Morphological Parameters

24

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 25: Project report submitted to the compatible

Fig3 Experimental site at North Bank Plain Zone of Assam

25

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 26: Project report submitted to the compatible

32Preparation of soil beds

The experimental site was ploughed with the help of a tractor Manures were added and the

site was left for a week time so that the weeds and other microbes could be removed

Fertilizers like urea and SSP were applied 32 KGha and 220kgha respectively

Temporary polythene shed was constructed to create a temporary water stress condition

Removing of weeds and proper mixing of manure was followed by bed preparation A total

of 24 beds were prepared consisting of 9 rows and 4 columns maintaining requisite gaps

between plants and rows (P-P = 10Cm R-R =30Cm)

33 Experimental design

The experiment was conducted in Randomized block design (RBD) The varieties taken for

Black gram were C1-T9 C2-PU-39 and for green gram were C3-Pratap C4-TMB-37which

were collected from Regional Agricultural Research Station (RARS) Shillongoni Nagaon

We arranged 4 treatments -

C1 C2 C3 C4 - Were the control plants where watering was done regularly

C1T C2T C3T C4Tndash Were the treatment plants where watering was withdrawn for three

weeks during the reproductive stage We also arranged three replications for each treatment

Seeds were soaked in running tap water and then sown in the field on 4 th of September 2011

Watering was done in all the plots till 37 days And it was stopped in the plants which were

under treatment And thereafter again watering was done from the 58th day which starts with

the recovery period

The physico-chemical characteristics of soil were determined in the beginning of the experiment Change in morphological and biochemical characters were recorded during the stressed and the recovery period Finally the yield was also recorded

34 Soil Analysis

Soil Samples were collected in polythene bags and transferred into laboratory Then the

collected soils were dried and processed for further analysis by sieving through 2mm sieve

26

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 27: Project report submitted to the compatible

341 Bulk Density

The bulk density was determined by using the disturbed method In this method the weight of

an empty bottle without the stopper was first taken Then the bottle was filled with the dried

soil sample The bottle was tapped 15-20 times on a table by letting it fall from a height of

about 5 cm This tapping was assumed to produce the same intensity of packing of soil as

naturally occurring in the field Then the bottle was weighed again After that the bottle was

emptied and the volume of the bottle was measured by adding water from a burette up to the

rim

Bulk density was calculated as follows

W2 ndash W1

Bulk density of soil Db = -----------------------

V

Where

W1= weight of empty bottle

W2= weight of the bottle with soil

V = volume of water required to fill the bottle

342 Soil Reactions or Soil pH

Soil pH is a measure of the ldquohydrogen ion activityrdquo and depends largely on relative amount of

the absorbed hydrogen ions Thus it is a good measure of acidity and alkalinity of soil water

suspensions and provides a good identification of the soil chemical nature

pH of soil suspension highly depends on the soil water ratio and increases with dilution

Procedure

10 g of soil sample was mixed with 25 ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution was

stirred with a glass rod at regular interval for about 1 hour After that the pH of the

suspension was recorded with the help of digital pH meter

27

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 28: Project report submitted to the compatible

343 Soil Conductivity

10gm of soil sample was mixed with 50ml water to prepare the soil solution The solution

was then put in a shaker for 30 minutes After that with a digital electrical conductivity meter

conductivity of soil is recorded

344 Moisture or Water Content of the Soil

Water which occupies together with air the non solid porosity of soil is considered to be the

prime regulator of physical and chemical processes as well as biological activities in the soil

Water is essential for photosynthesis in the maintenance of soil turgidity Water acts

primarily as solvent and nutrient carrier from soil to the plant and then within the plant

Gravimetric method for soil moisture measurement

This is the standard and most simple method for determining the amount of water in soil The

principle involved is to place the weighed soil sample in an oven at 105oC and to dry it to a

constant weight The weight difference is considered to be the amount of water present This

water is expressed as a per cent of dry soil

APPARATUS

1 Sampling auger

2 Moisture cans

3 Balance with weights

4 Hot air oven

5 Desiccator

PROCEDURE

1 The clean dry moisture can along with its lid was weighed

2 The soil samples were collected with sampling auger from the required depth and

immediately about 50-100 g of soil was put in the moisture can and closed with the

tight fitting lid

3 The can containing soil sample was weighed with precision

4 The can containing moist soil was put in an oven The lid was removed and the soil

was dried at 105oC for 24 hours

28

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 29: Project report submitted to the compatible

5 After 24 hours the oven was switched off the sample was cooled for some time and

then transferred to a desiccator for further cooling The weight of the can with dried

soil was taken

6 Step 5 was repeated until a constant weight of can plus dry soil was obtained

CALCULATION

Weight of the empty can = W1

Weight of can + moist soil = W2

Weight of can + dry soil = W3

Amount of water present = W2 ndash W3

Weight of oven dry soil = W3 ndash W1

Weight of water

Soil moisture content by weight () = --------------------------------- x 100

Weight of oven dry soil

W2 ndash W3

= --------------------- x 100

W3 ndash W1

345 Soil Water holding Capacity

The water holding capacity of soil is defined as the capacity of water to hold water in plant

available form This is an important characteristic of soil for plant growth Soil that can hold

a lot of water support more plant growth and are less susceptible to leaching losses of

nutrients and pesticides

Procedure

1 The crushed soil sample was dried in an oven at 105oC overnight

2 A filter paper was placed inside the perforated bottom of the air cooled soil

box

3 The box was weighed and filled with dry soil

4 The box was placed in a petridish of 10cm diameter containing water for about

12 hour so that water enters the box and saturates the soil

5 The box is taken out from water wiped and then weighed again

29

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 30: Project report submitted to the compatible

6 The water holding capacity of the soil sample is calculated by using the

following formula

Water holding capacity () = (W2-W0)-(W1-W0)

-----------------------

W1-W2

Where W0= Weight of the empty box

W1= Weight of the box with soil

W2= Weight of the box with saturated soil

346 DETERMINATION OF AVAILABLE NITROGEN IN SOIL

PRINCIPLE

A given amount of soil is treated with an excess of alkaline KMnO4 and distilled KMnO4 is

a mild oxidizing agent in an alkaline medium (NaOH) Organic matter present in soil is

oxidized by the nascent oxygen liberated by KMnO4 in presence of NaOH and thus NH3

released is distilled and absorbed in a known volume of standard acid (boric acid) which is

titrated with HCl

REAGENTS

032 KMnO 4 32 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in distilled water and the volume was

made up to 1 litre

25 NaOH 25 g of NaOH pellets were dissolved in distilled water and volume

make up was done to 1 litre

4 Boric acid 40 g of H3BO3 was dissolved in 1 litre of distilled water

001N HCl

Liquid paraffin wax

Mixed indicator 03 g of bromocresol green and 02 g of methyl red was dissolved in

400 ml of 90 ethanol The indicator colour will change from red in acid solution to

blue in alkaline solution

30

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 31: Project report submitted to the compatible

PROCEDURE

1 3 g soil sample was taken in a 250 ml digestion tube

2 30ml 032 KMnO4 and 1ml liquid paraffin were added to it

3 Then the digestion tube was fitted well in the distillation unit for distillation

4 30 ml of 4 boric acid along with a few drops of mixed indicator were taken in a

250ml conical flask

5 The flask was fitted to the ammonia exhaust pipe

6 30ml 25 NaOH was then added to the contents of the digestion tube in three splits

7 Then the contents of the tube were distilled for 9 minutes and the distilled ammonia

was collected in the boric acid solution in the conical flask

8 After distillation was complete the collected ammonia solution was titrated with

001N HCl to original pink colour

9 A blank was carried out without soil following the same procedure

10 The burette reading (BR) was recorded

The titration part was carried out manually using gravimetric titration while the distillation

part was carried out using Kjeldahl methodology in a Nitrogen Analyzer having the following

details

Make Pelican Equipments

Model Digester KEL PLUS KES 12 L

Distiller KEL PLUS Distyl EM

CALCULATION

Correction of BR BRsample - BRblank

14 times BR times N of acid

Available Nitrogen () = ------------------------------------------------ x 100

Sample Weight times 1000

31

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 32: Project report submitted to the compatible

Available Nitrogen (Kgha) = N times 2 times 104

14 times BR times 001

= ------------------------- times 100 times 224 times 104

3 times 1000

= BR times 1045

35 Plant Morphological parameters

The following plant morphological parameters were studied was studied at seven days

interval

Plant height-It was measured by a ruler scale

Leaf number It was counted manually in the field

Leaf area It was done with the help of graph paper

Pod number It was also counted manually

bull Root and Shoot Biomass Plant fresh weight was taken immediately after coming to

laboratory and for dry weight it was kept in the oven overnight at the temperature

80oC

36 Yield Parameters

On maturity of the plants harvesting was done on 26-11-2011 that was 37th day The

following yield attributing parameters like number of pod per plant number of seeds per pod

weight of each pod and seeds per pod and finally the weight of seeds per plant of treatment

including the control was calculated

Taking above parameters various indexes have been calculated out-

1) Harvest index Pod dry weight

-------------------------------------------

Total biomass on dry wt basis

32

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 33: Project report submitted to the compatible

2) Drought susceptibility index (1- Yield drought)

---------------------------------

Yield controlDII

Where DII = (1-mean yield droughtmean yield control)

3) Drought tolerance index (Yield stress times Yield control)

-----------------------------------------

Mean yield control

4) Mean productivity Yield control+ Yield drought

-------------------------------------------

2

5) Rate productivity Yield drought

--------------------

Yield control

6) Geometrical yield Yield drought

radic ----------------------

Yield control

37 Statistical Analysis

For Analyze of Correlation SPSS 160 software was used

33

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 34: Project report submitted to the compatible

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

RESULTS

1) Soil Physico-chemical Parameters The soil samples were collected and analyzed to determine its various physico-

chemical properties such as bulk density pH water holding capacity and soil

available nitrogen the result of which are presented in the table below

Table 1 Physico-chemical parameters of the soil of the experimental field

Sl No Soil Parameters Results

1 Bulk density 08825gmcc

2 Soil pH 585at 314oC

3 Water holding capacity 4573

4 Soil conductivity 53micro Siemenscm

5 Soil Available Nitrogen 374mgkg

Moisture content of soil

The soil moisture contents () of all the plots were determined before the onsets of

the treatments during the stress period and at drought recovery stages The results obtained

are presented in table 2 and table 3

Table 2 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of black gram

34

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 35: Project report submitted to the compatible

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 9211 9343 9101 968627 9049 9201 9004 925137 9466 9179 9013 936744 9322 7093 9042 778651 9686 5915 9604 501358 9404 3327 9012 308465 9503 5094 9094 530873 9453 8020 9564 7689

Table3 Soil moisture content () during the stress period and recovery stages of green gram

Days after Sowing

Soil moisture content ()C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 9503 9547 9234 909527 9312 9138 9028 932437 9013 9100 9499 920844 8958 7306 9244 706251 9298 5567 9028 602258 9521 3696 8997 352165 9025 5494 9514 619273 9024 8439 9241 7902

2) Plant Morphophysiological Parameters

Plant morpho-physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number and leaf area and

pod number were studied at the beginning of treatment during the treatment period as well as

at recovery stages for both the crops

21) Plant height

Plant height was studied for each cultivar during treatment period and at recovery stages of

both black gram and green gram Drought stress has been found to decline the linear growth

of shoots in both the cultivars as compared to those of untreated ones

Upon re-watering both black gram and green gram plants started to recover in terms of

height but did not reach the control level The results are presented in Table 4 and Table 5

Table 4 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of black gram

Days after Plant Height (cm)

35

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 36: Project report submitted to the compatible

Sowing C1 C1T C2 C2T17 1883 1916 1765 156627 5507 2559 3766 213337 5666 2933 5633 253344 6066 3644 6133 293351 6166 4065 6366 313358 6837 4609 6533 376665 6533 4833 6767 403373 6613 4916 6866 4166

Table 5 Effect of low moisture stress on Plant Height (cm) of green gram

Days after Sowing

Plant Height (cm)C3 C3T C4 C4T

17 2016 1901 1866 181627 4133 2466 4133 256637 7466 2811 5566 291644 7766 3266 5806 343351 8066 3566 6033 370558 8302 3666 6366 418365 8302 4044 6466 453373 8633 4266 6533 4683

22) Leaf number

Leaf number is also an important parameter which is affected by drought and hence it was

studied for both the control and treatment plants in during the stressed as well as in the

recovery period During treatment period the number of leaves was found to be lesser than

that of the untreated plants and again it started to increase in the recovery period It can be

said that it was fluctuating The result is presented in table 6 and table 7

Table 6 Effect of low moisture stress on Leaf number of black gram

36

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 37: Project report submitted to the compatible

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 4 6 6 527 12 15 17 1137 18 23 27 1244 23 26 31 1451 23 25 33 1258 26 25 35 965 27 23 36 773 27 21 36 5

Table 7 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 6 6 5 527 17 9 13 1037 25 12 17 1444 31 16 18 1451 32 16 22 1458 34 12 27 1265 34 11 28 873 34 11 29 4

23) Leaf area

Leaf area was found to be increasing at a faster rate during the previous part of the treatment

period but later on there was no further increase in the leaf area However in the recovery

period a little increment was observed Results are presented in Table 8 and Table 9

Table 8 Effect of low moisture stress on leaf area (cm2) of black gram

Days after Sowing

Leaf area (cm2)C1 C1T C2 C2T

17 506 526 45 53727 1031 1185 665 80137 2209 1356 947 80144 2203 149 1472 106751 2398 1137 1979 113958 2612 899 2166 93665 2814 688 2041 71973 2742 418 2404 536

Table 9 Effect low moisture stress on leaf area (cm 2) of green gram

Days after Leaf area ( cm2)

37

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 38: Project report submitted to the compatible

Sowing C3 C3T C4 C4T17 446 613 503 34227 665 1211 905 62537 947 1548 905 85944 1472 1437 1677 119251 1979 1408 2071 10558 2166 1045 2221 75865 2041 891 2471 50973 2404 647 2766 335

24) Pod number

Pod number for each cultivar was recorded and it was found that it increased at a faster rate at

the beginning but later due to moisture stress the increment in the number of pods fell down

and got reduced as compared to the control plants Table 10 and Table 11 show the effect of

moisture stress on the number of pods of both the control and stressed plants

Table 10 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of black gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC1 C1T C2 C2T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 7 3 4 444 8 5 5 351 11 7 9 458 12 8 9 465 15 7 12 573 17 6 15 4

Table 11 Effect of low moisture stress on pod number of green gram

Days after Sowing

Pod numberC3 C3T C4 C4T

17 - - - -27 - - - -37 5 3 5 244 5 5 6 351 10 6 7 358 13 6 14 465 15 6 14 573 14 4 13 3

3) Yield and Yield Attributing Parameters

38

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 39: Project report submitted to the compatible

Drought stress was found to have significant effect on all the cultivars It severely

reduced crop yield of both the pulses The yield of both green gram and black gram were

calculated in terms of Gross yield (GI) Drought susceptibility index (DSI) Drought tolerance

index (DTI) Tolerance drought stress (TDS) Mean productivity (MP) and Rate productivity

(RP) The values of which are presented in table 12

Table12 Crop yield in terms of GY DSI DTI TDS MP and RP of both the pulses

Varieties GY DSI DTI TDS MP RP

C1 086 2026 077 -114 86021 -183

C2 084 1891 073 -171 40277 -581

C3 057 1054 034 076 15825 -1153

C4 085 666 075 -159 13485 -254

The crop yield on the basis of qha was also calculated out for both the control and treatment

plants of all four cultivars and these data are presented in table 16 below-

Table13 Crop yield of each variety under control and stressed condition

DISCUSSIONS

Water stress posses a major threat to crop production worldwide Water deficitdrought

affects every aspect of plant growth and the yield modifying the anatomy morphology

physiology biochemistry and finally the productivity of crop (Jones et al 2003 Hafiz et al)

because water is essential at every stage of plant growth from seed germination to plant

maturation (Chaves et al 2003) so any degree of water imbalance may produce deleterious

effects on crop growth (El-Far etal 1995) Yegappan et al (1982) found that drought stress

reduced number of leaf head diameter leaf area weight of 1000 grains and grain yield

significantly In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a slight decline

during the water stress period Upon rewatering both black gram and green gram plants

started to recover in terms of their growth

39

Treatments Crop Yield (qha) Treatments Crop Yield (qha)C1 2321 C3 1642

C1T 1729 C3T 477

C2 2182 C4 792

C2T 1609 C4T 538

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 40: Project report submitted to the compatible

Plant Height

Water stress has been found to reduce greatly the linear growth of shoots (Mazhar et al

1996 Mitchel etal 1997) In the present study the plant height and the leaf area showed a

slight decline during the stress period which coincides with the results obtained by Nielson et

al (1998) Kawakami et al (2006) Guerrier et al (1990) Water stress had the drastic

effect on the plant height of all the wheat varieties in the experiment conducted by Ahmad et

al (2009) The wheat varieties used in this experiment showed significant differences

(plt005) between them an increasing level of water stress for plant height This reduction in

plant height is generally associated with a decline in the cell enlargement and more leaf

senescence under water stress as concluded by Bhatt amp Srinivasa Rao (2005)

Fig4 Effect of low moisture stress on plant height of both the pulses

From the analysis of variance (ANOVA) it was found that regarding plant height black gram

is significant as the calculated value was smaller than the tabulated value However green

gram was found insignificant as its calculated value was larger than the tabulated value On

finding out the correlation in SPSS 160 software it was found that plant height is positively

correlated with soil moisture content in both black gram and green gram

40

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 41: Project report submitted to the compatible

Leaf number

After studying the leaf number of both black gram and green gram it was found that at initial

stage of treatment it was increasing but later due to less moisture availability defoliation was

seen more in green gram compared to black gram Similar results were obtained by Sacks et

al (1997) Manivannan et al (2007 amp 2008) while working with maize and sunflower

Water deficit stress mostly reduced leaf growth and in turn the leaf areas in many species of

plant like Populus (Wullschleger et al 2005) soybean (Zhang et al 2004) In some other

studies it was also concluded that drought stress greatly reduced the grain yield which was

dependent on the level of defoliation ie reduction in leaf number due to water stress during

early reproductive growth (Kamara et al 2003 Monneveux et al 2006) A major effect of

drought is reduction in photosynthesis which arises by a decrease in leaf expansion impaired

photosynthetic machinery premature leaf senescence and associated reduction in food

production (Wahid and Rasul 2005)

Fig 5 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf number of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was found that black gram is significant compared to green gram

in terms of leaf number On finding out correlation between leaf number and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

41

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 42: Project report submitted to the compatible

Leaf area

Water stress has been found to reduce leaf area photosynthesis leaf chlorophyll contents and

consequently grain yield (Jun-Chen and Dai-Junying 1996)An increase in plant leaf area

resulted in an increase in dry matter production at a similar rate for both non-stress and stress

conditions Cultivar and water availability determined leaf area development and in turn

leaf area determined the amount of dry matter produced (Maria Gomez et al 2005) In our

experiment also leaf area has been found to be increasing before the onset of the treatment

During the initial stage of treatment it was increasing later on leaf expansion was reduced

However during recovery period it again showed a level of increase The reduced leaf area

observed in the stressed plants resulted primarily from a mitotic sensitivity to water stress in

cotton leaves (Jerry Berlin et al 2007) Leaf area distribution between primary and lateral

shoots was not significantly modified by water stress The capacity to form leaf area and the

sensitivity of leaf area development to water stress were apparently under genetic control

(Constantino Ruiz et al 2005)

Fig6 Effect of low moisture stress on plant leaf area of both the pulses

On analysing the variance it was again found that black gram is significant compared to green

gram in terms of leaf area On finding out correlation between leaf area and soil moisture

content it was found positive for both the pulses

42

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 43: Project report submitted to the compatible

Yield and yield attributing parameters

Many yield-determining physiological processes in plants respond to water stress Yield

integrates many of these physiological processes in a complex way Thus it is difficult

to interpret how plants accumulate combine and display the ever-changing and indefinite

physiological processes over the entire life cycle of crops (Nonami 1998 Kaya et al 2006

Hussain et al 2008) Drought stress in soybean reduced total seed yield and the branch seed

yield (Frederick et al2001)Yield is generally correlated with the length of crop duration

under favourable growing conditions and any decline in crop duration below the optimum

would tax yield (Turner et al 2001)Water stress reduces seed yield in soybean usually as a

result of fewer pods and seeds per unit area (Specht et al 2001)Yield attributing parameters

such as crop yield geometrical yield drought tolerance index drought susceptibility index

tolerance drought stress mean productivity and rate production

(a) (b)

Fig7 Relationship of low moisture stresses on (a) crop yield and (b) geometrical yield of

black gram and green gram

43

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 44: Project report submitted to the compatible

(a) (b)

Fig 8 Relationship of low moisture stress on mean productivity and rate productivity

In the present experiment the biomass yields and seed yield of both the pulses (black gram

and green gram) were found to increase in control sets almost in all levels as found out by

(Cure and Acock 1986 Roggers and Dahlmann 1993) However impact was seen in the

treatment sets in all levels especially more impact was seen more in C3 variety of green gram

than both the varieties of black gram Similar results were also by (Daneshian J and P

Jonobi et al 2001) that drought stress is one of the important soybean growth limiting

factor which decreases plant growth during vegetative stage Chimenti et al (2002) Erdem

et al (2006) indicated that grain yield and weight of 1000 grains decreased with increasing

drought stress Karam et al (2007) showed that with increasing drought stress leaf area

index grain yield and its component decreased which is also found in our study

According to other yield attributing parameters like drought susceptibility index drought

tolerance index mean productivity and rate productivity the black gram variety T9 is more

resistant than PU-39 and for green gram Pratap is more resistant than TMB-37 against

drought stress which coincides with the findings of Azimzadeh et al (2011) and Toker et al

(1996) Positive correlation was obtained between yield of both the pulse cultivars and soil

moisture content with a value of 0415 in black gram and in green gram it is 061 Although

the applied drought significantly affected all the cultivars by drought stress leading to loss of

growth productivity and yield the impact was somewhat lesser in black gram cultivars in

comparison to green gram cultivars which reveal that black gram is more resistant than green

gram against drought stress

44

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 45: Project report submitted to the compatible

Chapter5

ConclusionThe present experiment was conducted with the two common pulse crops namely black gram

(Vigna mungoL) and green gram (Vigna radiataL) with the objective to study the morpho-

physiological changes that took place in response to the low moisture stress The morpho-

physiological parameters such as plant height leaf number leaf area pod number were

studied under moisture stress condition as well as subsequent recovery stage

On maturation yields of these two crops were recorded The study revealed that moisture

stress has significant impact on all these parameters Plant height was seen to be increased in

the initial part of the treatment however it was reduced during the treatment period however

there was an increase in the height during the recovery period Positive correlation was seen

between plant height and soil moisture for both black gram and green gram Leaf number was

also seen to be reducing in number due to less availability of moisture in the soil But more

impact was seen in green gram In case of leaf area both black gram and green gram showed

positive correlation with the soil moisture content which can be inferred that leaf growth is

very much susceptible to moisture content Lastly it can be concluded that all the

morphological parameters had positive correlation with the soil moisture content And that if

we compare the impact of low moisture stress on both the pulse crops then green gram is

more sensitive compared to black gram which proofed that black gram C1(T9) is resistant to

low moisture stress and C3(Pratap) is susceptible to moisture stress

45

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 46: Project report submitted to the compatible

Chapter-6References

Abbadi J and J Gerendas (2009) Nitrogen use efficiency of Safflower as compared

to sunflower J Pant Nutrition Vol 32(6) 929-945

Abdul Jaleel C Manivannan P Sankar B Kishorekumar A Gopi R

Somasundaram R Panneerselvam R (2007) Water deficit stress mitigation by

calcium chloride in Catharanthus roseus Effects on oxidative stress proline

metabolism and indole alkaloid accumulation Colloid Surf B 60 110ndash116

Agarwal PK Agarwal P Reddy MK Sopory SK (2006) Role of DREB

transcription factors in abiotic and biotic stress tolerance in plants Plant Cell Rep 25

1263ndash1274

Aharon R Shahak Y Wininger S Bendov R Kapulnik Y Galili G (2003)

Overexpression of a plasma membrane aquaporins in transgenic tobacco improves

plant vigour under favourable growth conditions but not under drought or salt stress

Plant Cell 15 439ndash447

Ahmad S H R Ahmad M Y Ashraf M Ashraf and E A Waraich (2009)

Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L) response to drought stress at germination and

seedling growth stages Pak J Bot 41(2) 647-654

Aless G G F Power and D C Zimmerman (1997) Sunflower yield and water use

as influenced by planting date populateion and row spacing Agron J 69 465-469

Ali Meo A (2000) Impact of variable drought stress and nitrogen levels on plant

height root length and grain numbers per plant in a sunflower (Helianthus annuus L)

Var Shams Pah J Agri Sci Vol 37(1-2) 89-92

Allison J C S and R J Haslam(1993) Theoritical assessment of potential for

increasing productivity of sugarcane throught increased nitrogen fertilization Proc

South African Sugar Technol Assoc 57-59

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003a Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) I Effect on morphological characters Pakistan J

Agric Sci 40 43ndash44

46

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 47: Project report submitted to the compatible

Anjum F M Yaseen E Rasul A Wahid and S Anjum 2003b Water stress in

barley (Hordeum vulgare L) II Effect on chemical composition and chlorophyll

contents Pakistan J Agric Sci 40 45ndash49

Ashraf MY AR Azmi AH Khan and SA Ala 1994 Effect of water stress on

total phenols peroxidase activity and chlorophyll content in wheat (Triticum aestivum

L) genotypes under soil water deficits Acta Physiol Plant 16 185ndash191

Begg J E and Turner N C 1976 Crop Water Deficit Adv in Agron 28 161-217

Bhatt RM and NK Srinivasa Rao 2005 Influence of pod load response of okra to

water stress Indian J Plant Physiol 10 54ndash59

Blum A 1983 Genetic and Physiological Relationships in Plant Breeding for

Drought Resistance Agr Water Manage 7 195-205

Blum A 1996 Constitutive traits affecting plant performance under stress In

Edmeades GO M Banziger HR Mickelson and CB Pena- Valdivia (eds)

Developing Drought and Low N Tolerant Maize pp 131ndash35

Burow M D and Coors J G 1994 Diallel A Microcomputer Program for the

Simulation and Analysis of Diallel Crosses Agron

Buschmann C Lichtenthaler HK 1998 Principles and characteristics of multi-colour

fluorescence imaging of plants Journal of Plant Physiology 152 297ndash314

Chaves MM JS Pereira J Maroco ML Rodriques CPP Ricardo ML Osorio

I Carvatho T Faria and C Pinheiro 2002 How plants cope with water stress in the

field photosynthesis and growth AnnBot 89 907ndash916

Chaves MM Oliveira MM 2004 Mechanisms underlying plant resilienceto water

deficits prospects for water-saving agriculture Journal of Experimental Botany 55

2365ndash2384

Farooq M A Wahid N Kobayashi D Fujita and SMA Basra 2009 Plant

drought stress effects mechanisms and management Agron Sustain Dev 29 185ndash

212

Farooq M SMA Basra A Wahid ZA Cheema MA Cheema and A Khaliq

2008 Physiological role of exogenously applied glycinebetaine in improving drought

tolerance of fine grain aromatic rice (Oryza sativa L) J Agron Crop Sci 194 325ndash

333

Fischer RA Maurer R Drought Resistance in Spring Wheat Cultivars I Grain

Yield Response Aust J Agric Res 29 897-912 1978

47

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 48: Project report submitted to the compatible

Flenet F A Boundiols and C Suriava (1996) Sunflower response to a range of soil

water contents European Journal of Agronomy 15 161-167

Gardner F P R B Piers and R L Michel (1994) Agronomy plant physiology

Mashhad JDM press P 467 (Translation in Persian)

Gaspar T T Franck B Bisbis C Kevers L Jouve JF Hausman and J Dommes

2002 Concepts in plant stress physiology Application to plant tissue cultures Plant

Growth Regul 37263ndash285

Gubbels G H and W Dedio (1999) Effect of plant density and soil fertility on oil

seed sunflower genotypes Can J Pl Sci 66 (3)521-527

Harris HC Williams JR Mason MK (1978) Influence of temperature on oil content

and composition of sunflower seed Aust J Agric Res 291203ndash1212

Hasanzade A (2002) The effect of different amounts of Nitrogen fertilizer on yield

and yield component and grain oil of sunflower Uremia Agri SCI Research 2125-

33

Hashemi-Dezfouli A and S J Herbert (1992)Effect of leaf orientation and density

on yield of corn Iran Agric Res 11 89 - 104

Havaux M Strasser RJ Greppin H 1991 A theoretical and experimental analysis of

the qp and qnp coefficients of chlorophyll fluorescence quenching and their relation

to photochemical and nonphotochemical events Photosynthesis Research 27 41ndash55

Havaux M 1998 Carotenoids as membrane stabilizers in chloroplasts Trends Plant

Sci 3 147ndash151

Heuer B and A Nadler 1995 Growth development and yield of potatoes under

salinity and water deficit Australian J Agric Res 46 1477ndash1486

Human J J D Dutoit H D Benzuid Enhout and L P Bruyn (1998) The

influence of plant water stress on net photosynthesis and yield of

SunflowerAgriculttural University of south Africa Crop Science 164(4)231-241

Hura T Grzesiak S Hura K Grzesiak MT Rzepka A 2006Differences in the

physiological state between triticale and maize plants during drought stress and

followed rehydration expressed by the leaf gas exchange and spectrofluorimetric

methods Acta Physiologiae Plantarum 28 433ndash443

Jaleel CA B Sankar PV Murali M Gomathinayagam GMALakshmanan and

R Panneerselvam 2008e Water deficit stress effects on reactive oxygen metabolism

48

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 49: Project report submitted to the compatible

in Catharanthus roseus impacts on ajmalicine accumulation Colloids Surf B

Biointerfaces62 105ndash111

Jaleel CA P Manivannan A Kishorekumar B Sankar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007c Alterations in osmoregulation antioxidant enzymes

and indole alkaloid levels in Catharanthus roseus exposed to water deficit Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 59 150ndash157

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007a Pseudomonas fluorescens enhances biomass yield and

ajmalicine production in Catharanthus roseus under water deficit stress Colloids

Surf B Biointerfaces 60 7ndash11

Jaleel CA P Manivannan B Sankar A Kishorekumar R Gopi R Somasundaram

and R Panneerselvam 2007b Water deficit stress mitigation by calcium chloride in

Catharanthus roseus effects on oxidative stress proline metabolism and indole

alkaloid accumulation Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 60 110ndash116

Johansen B Baldev B Brouwer JB Erskine W Jermyn WA Li-Juan L

Malik BA Ahad Miah A Slim SN Biotic and Abiotic Stresses Constraining

Productivity of Cool Season Food Legumes in Asia Africa and Oceania in

Expanding the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds FJ

Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Kluwer Academic Pub printed theNetherlands p175-

194 1994

Kalra N Aggarwal PK Chander S Pathak H Choudhary R Chaudhary A Mukesh S

Rai HK Soni UA Anil S Jolly M Singh UK Owrs A Hussain MZ (2003) Impacts

of climate change on agriculture In Shukla PR Subodh KS Ravindranath NH Garg

A Bhattacharya S (eds) Climate change and India vulnerability assessment and

adaptation University Press India pp 191ndash226

Kozlowski TT (1997) Responses to woody plants to flooding and salinity Tree

physiology Monograph No 1 Heron Publishing Victoria Canada

Levitt J (1972) Responses of plants to environmental stresses Academic Press New

YorkSan FranciscoLondon

Lopez MT Toojinda T Vanavichit A Tragoonrung S (2003) Microsatellite markers

flanking the tms2 gene facilitated tropical TGMS rice line development Crop Sci

432267ndash2271

Majee M Maitra S Dastidan GK Patnaik S Chatterjee A Hait NC Das KP

Majumdar AL (2004) A novel salt tolerant L-myo-Insositol-1-phosphate synthase

49

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 50: Project report submitted to the compatible

from Proteresia Coarctata (Roxb) Tateoka a haplophytic wild rice J Biol Chem

2728539ndash28552

Matthews MA Boyer JS 1984 Acclimation of photosynthesis to low water

potentials Plant Physiology 74 161ndash166

Mohammadian R M Moghaddam H Rahimian and SY Sadeghian 2005 Effect

of early season drought stress on growth characteristics of sugar beet genotypes

Turkisk J Bot 29 357ndash368

Monneveux P C Saacutenchez D Beck and GO Edmeades 2006 Drought tolerance

improvement in tropical maize source populations evidence of progress Crop Sci

46 180ndash191

Mozaffari K Y Arshi and H Zeinali-Khanghaa 1996 Research on the effects of

water stress on some morphophysiological traits and yield components of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) Seed Plant 12 24ndash33 Nam NH YS Chauhan and C

Johansen 2001 Effect of timing of drought stress on growth and grain yield of extra-

short-duration pigeonpea lines J Agric Sci 136 179ndash189

Nayyar H S Kaur S Singh and HD Upadhyaya 2006 Differential sensitivity of

Desi (small-seeded) and Kabuli (large seeded) chickpea genotypes to water stress

during seed filling effects on accumulation of seed reserves and yield J Sci Food

Agric 862076ndash2082

Petropoulos SA Dimitra Daferera MG Polissiou and HC Passam 2008 The

effect of water deficit stress on the growth yield and composition of essential oils of

parsley Sci Hort 115 393ndash397

Prabhudeva TV MM Chalapathi S Thimmegowda N Devakhumar GG Rao

and K Mallikarjuna 1998 Soil moisture stress and drought susceptibility index in

sunflower Indian Agric 42 287ndash289

Prochazkova D RK Sairam GC Srivastava and DV Singh 2001 Oxidative

stress and antioxidant activity as the basis of senescence in maize leaves Plant Sci

161 765ndash777

Razmjoo K P Heydarizadeh and MR Sabzalian 2008 Effect of salinity and

drought stresses on growth parameters and essential oil content of Matricaria

chamomile Int J Agric Biol 10 451ndash454

Reddy AR KV Chaitanya and M Vivekanandan 2004 Drought induced

responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants J Plant

Physiol 161 1189ndash1202

50

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 51: Project report submitted to the compatible

Sacks MM WK Silk and P Burman 1997 Effect of water stress on cortical cell

division rates within the apical meristem of primary roots of maize Plant Physiol

114 519ndash527

Sadiq II Siddiqui KA Arain CR Azmi AR Wheat Breeding in a Water-

Stress Environment I Delineation of Drought Tolerance and susceptibility Plant

Breeding 113 36-46 1994

Samarah NH 2005 Effects of drought stress on growth and yield of barley Agron

Sustain Dev 25 145ndash149

Saxena MC The Challenge of Developing Biotic and Abiotic Stress Resistance in

Cool-Season Food Legumes in Breeding for Stress Tolerance in Cool-Season Food

Legumes Edited by KB Singh and MC Saxsena A Wiley-Sayce Publication p3-

14 1993

Sevilla Spain JA Consejeriacutea de Agricultura y Pesca Specht JE K Chase M

Macrander GL Graef J Chung JP Markwell M Germann JH Orf and KG

Lark 2001 Soybean response to water A QTL analysis of drought tolerance Crop

Sci 41 493ndash509

Singh KB Malhotra RS Halila MH Knights EJ Verma MM Current Status

and Future Strategy in Breeding Chickpea for Resistance to Biotic and Abiotic

Stresses in Expending the Production and Use of Cool Season Food Legumes Eds

FJ Muehlbauer and WJ Kaiser Klwer Academic Pub printed the Netherlands p

572-591 1994

Singh V S K Sharma BI Verma and V Singh (1995) Response of rainy season

sunflower (Helianthus annuus) to irrigation and nitrogen under north western

Rajasthan Indian Journal of Agronomy 40 239-242

Smirnoff N 1993 The role of active oxygen in the response of plants to water

deficit and desiccation New Phytol 125 27ndash58

Soriano MA FJ Villalobos and E Fereres 2002 Stress timing effects on

sunflower harvest index In Villalobos FJ and L Testi (Eds) VII Congress of the

European Society for Agronomy pp 141ndash2

Taghdiri B G Ahmadvan and H A Mazaheri Laghab (2006) The effect of plant

spacing on yield and yield components of four sunflower cultivars Agri Res 6(1)

26-35

51

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52

Page 52: Project report submitted to the compatible

Tahir MHN and SS Mehid 2001 Evaluation of open pollinated sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) populations under water stress and normal conditions Int J

Agric Biol 3 236ndash238

Tahir MHN M Imran and MK Hussain 2002 Evaluation of sunflower

(Helianthus annuus L) inbred lines for drought tolerance Int J Agric Biol 3 398ndash

400

Tahkokorpi M K Taulavuori K Laine and E Taulavuori 2007 After effects of

drought-related winter stress in previous and current year stems of Vaccinium

myrtillus L Environ Exp Bot 61 85ndash93

Wery J Adaptation to Frost and Drought Stress in Chickpea and Implications in

Plant Breeding in MC Saxena JI Cubero and J Wery (eds) Present Status and

Future Prospect of Chickpea Crop Production and Improvement in the Mediterranean

Countries Options Mediterraneennes Serie A Seminaires Mediterranees No9

Zarogosa Spain CIHEAM p77-85 1990

Wullschleger SD TM Yin SP DiFazio TJ Tschaplinski LE Gunter MF

Davis and GA Tuskan 2005 Phenotypic variation in growth and biomass

distribution for two advanced-generation pedigrees of hybrid poplar Canadian J For

Res 35 1779ndash1789

Zaffaroni E and A A Schneiter (1991) Sunflower production as influenced by plant

type plant population and row arrangement Agron J 63113-118

Zhang M L Duan Z Zhai J Li X Tian B Wang Z He and Z Li 2004 Effects

of plant growth regulators on water deficit-induced yield loss in soybean Proceedings

of the 4th International Crop Science Congress Brisbane Australia

Zhao CX LY Guo CA Jaleel HB Shao and HB Yang 2008 Prospects for

dissecting plant-adaptive molecular mechanisms to improve wheat cultivars in

drought environments Comp Rend Biol 331 579ndash586

52