Screening for Salt Tolerant Forage SpeciesConducted by Allison Levy, Undergraduate

Under the Direction of Dr. James Bauder, Professor

Screening for Salt TolerancePhase I

Phase II

Phase III

Research Objectives• Determine survivability and early plant biomass

production sixteen different forage species (phase I & II ).

• Irrigate with water qualities that were chosen to represent conditions of water surface supplies that could result from coal bed methane (CBM) development.

• Define a short list of species that are in a long-term experiment to assess (forage) biomass production potential utilizing CBM x surface water mixes (phase II & III)

• Field scale demo

(phase III)

Plant x Salinity Background

• Osmotic effect

• Glycophytes

•Salinity effects plant growth

-germination

-vegetative growth

-reproductive growth

Background-Plant x Salinity

Germination

• Low salinity stimulates germination (Croser et al., 2001)

• Salinity inhibits germination by limiting water uptake (Croser et al., 2001)

• High amounts of Na, and Cl affect availability of other ions: K, Mg, N or P (Rogers, 1997)

Phase I:Germination Screening

• determine survivability and early plant biomass production of sixteen different forage species

• irrigated with water qualities that represent conditions that could result from CBM development

• Define a short list of species to be used in phase II & III

Water Treatments

E C 2 .5 m m ho s /cmS A R 4

P o w d e r R ive r W a te r

E C 3 .5 m m ho s /cmS A R 12

C B M D ischa rg e W a ter

E C 8 m m ho s /cmS A R 23

S a lin e -S od ic W a te r

• Nine trays.• Dimensions 45 x 35 x

9 inches.• Each tray contained 4

flats.• Each flat had 4 species • 16 species per tray• Three trays per

replication• Within a rep each tray

received one of the three water qualities

• One drainage hole on the bottom side of each tray

Design :

Phase I

• Water reached predetermined level during each irrigation cycle

• Water chemistries applied for five-day intervals discarded and replaced with new 100L stock solution

• Each 100 L stock solution contained 500mL nutrients

Design :Phase 1

Planting

• Sand was selected planting medium.

• Species within each replication were randomized:

-four species per flat

-two rows per species

-twenty seeds per row

Species Used in Screening for Salt Tolerance:Phase I

•Corn Zea mays•Altai Elymus angustus•Tall Wheatgrass Agropyron elongatum•Crested Wheatgrass Agropyron cristatum•Kochia Kochia scorparia•Sorghum Bicolor (L.) moench•Intermediate Wheatgrass Agropyron intermedium•Newhly Wheatgrass Elyrtigia repens x Pseudoroegneria spicata•Tall Fescue Festuca arundinacea•Paiute Orchardgrass Dactylis glomerata L.•Slender Wheatgrass Agropyron trachycaulum•Perennial Ryegrass Lolium perennal•Valier Hordeum valier•Sugarbeets Beta vulgaris L.•Hi Mag Tall Fescue Festuca arundinacea hi mag•2nd Gen. Alfalfa Medicago sativa

Harvest• Five-week germination

period

• Counted plants

• Harvested for above ground biomass

• Plant samples were oven dried

• Samples were weighed

• Sand samples were dried and sent to lab

Analyses

• Post germination soil analyzed for electrical conductivity (salinity), SAR (sodium adsorption ratio), base cations (Na, Ca, and Mg), pH, and bicarbonates

• Species x water quality combination determined

• Determined germination and survivability

Results- ANOVAForage Species Germination Study

ANOVA F valueSource of Variation n Germination BiomassSpecies 16 25.71 *** 62.93 ***Water Quality 3 2.67 * 8.56 ***Species x Water 48 0.77 ns 3.27 ***Replications 3

F values followed by ***, **, * are significant at the 99, 95, 90 % levels.

.

0.000.501.001.502.002.503.003.504.004.505.00

Abo

ve g

roun

d bi

omas

s (g

)

Powder River CBM Saline-sodic

<0.2

* *

*

**

**

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40G

erm

inat

ion

Powder River CBM Saline-sodic

<20

* *

*

*

*

*

*

LSD of Germination Means

24.50

25.00

25.50

26.00

26.50

27.00

27.50

28.00

28.50

29.00

Ger

min

atio

n M

ean

Power River CBM Saline-sodic

A

B B

Means with the same letter are not significantly different

LSD of Biomass Means

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Bio

mas

s M

ean

s

Powder River CBM Saline -sodic

B

A

C

Means with the same letter arenot significantly different

The Short List:

Phase IICorn Zea maysTall fescue Festuca arundunaceaIntermediate wheatgrass Agropyron intermediumSlender wheatgrass Agropyron trachycaulumAltai wildrye Elymus angustusTall wheatgrass Agropyron elongatumValier barley Hordeum valier Sorghum Bicolor (L.) moench

Design : Phase II Short List Greenhouse Experiment

3 replicate randomized block

pot within pot

evaporation pan10% leaching fraction

W a te r T re a tm e n ts

E C 3 .5 m m ho s /cmS A R 12

C B M D ischa rg e W a ter

E C 8 m m ho s /cmS A R 23

S a lin e -sod ic W a te r

Phase II: “Grow Out” Greenhouse Experiment

Planting : Phase IIPlanting medium: sand

Species within each rep were randomized:1 species per pot30 seeds for grasses10 seeds corn20 seeds barley

Harvest

Corn

AltaiWildryeAbove ground biomass

Root mass

Dried & weighed

Sent to lab for analysis

Analyses•Post germination soil analyzed for electrical conductivity (salinity), SAR (sodium adsorption ratio), base cations (Na, Ca, and Mg), pH, and bicarbonates

•Species x water quality combination determined

•Determined germination and survivability

•Plant tissue analyses

Root MassANOVASource of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit

Species 931.39 7.00 133.06 11.33 0.00 2.31Water Quality 385.84 1.00 385.84 32.85 0.00 4.15Species x Water 153.42 7.00 21.92 1.87 0.11 2.31Error 375.87 32.00 11.75

Total 1846.52 47.00ALPHA: 0.05

BiomassANOVA

Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F critSpecies 896.52 7.00 128.07 10.46 0.00 2.31Water Quality 89.54 1.00 89.54 7.31 0.01 4.15Species x water 83.96 7.00 11.99 0.98 0.46 2.31Error 391.73 32.00 12.24

Total 1461.76 47.00ALPHA: 0.05

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Bio

mas

s (g

ram

s)

CBM Saline-sodic

Dry Weight Above Ground Biomass in Sand

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Ro

ot

mas

s (g

ram

s)

CBM

Saline-sodic

Dry Weight Root Mass in Sand

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

20.00

Roo

t mas

s (g

ram

s)

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

20.00

Bio

mass (

gra

ms)

CBM Saline-sodic

Irrigated with Saline-sodic Water Sand vs. Clay

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

Ab

ove

gro

un

d b

iom

ass

(g)

Sand

Clay

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

100.00

Ro

ot

Mas

s (g

)

Sand Clay

Irrigated with Saline-sodic Water

Sand vs. Clay

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

100.00

Ro

ot

Mas

s (g

)

Sand Clay

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

Ab

ove

gro

un

d b

iom

ass

(g)

Sand

Clay

The Short List:

Phase IIICorn Zea maysTall fescue Festuca arundunaceaIntermediate wheatgrass Agropyron intermediumSlender wheatgrass Agropyron trachycaulumAltai wildrye Elymus angustusTall wheatgrass Agropyron elongatumValier barley Hordeum valier Harrington barley Hordeum harrington Maritime (seacoast) barley Hays barley MT 981060Saltbush Atriplex aptera

Design

Hayes Ranch: Tongue River

Gay Ranch: Powder River

Thanks To:

Dr. James Bauder

The entire “Jimmy clan”