Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Determination of Drought Tolerance for Some Cotton Genotypes (Gossypium hirsutum L.) under Deficit Irrigation Conditions

Yıl 2019, , 685 - 693, 31.10.2019

Mualla Keten , Hasan Değirmenci , Ramazan Şadet Güvercin

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.509483
Cited By: 1

Öz

The aim of this study was to use water more
efficiently and  determine
drought-tolerant cotton genotypes by reducing the irrigation water at certain
rates. In this study, 7 different cotton genotypes (Aday 1, Aday 2, Aday 3,
Aday 4, Aday 5, Aday 6, and Aday 7) and a control variety (Stonville 468) were
used. In order to determine drought tolerance, parameters including Stress
Susceptibility Index (SSI), Yield Stability Index (YSI), Yield Reduction Ratio
(Yr), Yield Index (YI), Tolerance Index (TOL), Mean Productivity (MP), Harmonic
Mean (HM), Geometric Mean Productivity, Modified Stress Tolerance (K1STI- index
calculated from potential yields, K2STI- index calculated from yield values in
stress conditions) Stress Tolerance Index (STI) and Yield Strength Index (YSI)
were used. Stressed and non-stress conditions applicability of HM, MP, GMP,
STE, K1STI indices has appeared in Aday 4 genotypes. The highest value of MP
was found in Aday 6 genotype. The lowest SSI index was in genotype Aday 2. As a
result of the mean comparison (LSD), principal component analysis (PCA) and
cluster analysis, the Aday 2 genotype was found highly tolerant to drought
under non stress conditions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Drought sensitive index Deficit irrigation Cotton Cluster analyses

Kaynakça

  • Anonim 2015. Kahramanmaraş Meteoroloji İl Müdürlüğü.
  • Anwar J, Subhani GM, Makhdoom H, Javed A, Mujahid H, Munir M 2011. Drought tolerance indices and their correlation with yield in exotic wheat genotypes. Pakistan J Bot, 43(3):1527-1530.
  • Akçura M, Partigoç F, Kaya Y 2011. Evaluating of drought stress tolerance based on selection indices in Turkish bread wheat landraces. The Journal of Animal &Plant Sciences, 21(4): 700-709.
  • Astel A, Tsakovski S, Barbieri P, Simeonov V 2007. Comparison of self-organizing maps classi- fication approach with cluster and principal com- ponents analysis for large environmental data sets. Water Research, 41: 4566–4578. doi:10.1016/j.watres.
  • Baloch MJ, Khan NU, J WA, Hassan G, Khakgwani AA, Soomro ZA, Veesar NF 2011. Drought tolerance studies through wssi and stomata in upland cotton. Pak.J.Bot., 43(5):2479-2484.
  • Blum A 1988. Plant breeding for stress environments. CRC Press, Florida. P.212.
  • Bouslama M, Schapaugh WT 1984. Stress tolerance in soy- bean. Part 1: evaluation of three screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance. Crop Sci., 24: 933-937. Drikvand R, Doosty B, Hosseinpour T 2012. Response of rainfed wheat genotypes to drought stress using drought tolerance indices. J Agr Sci, 4(7):126-131.
  • Eivazi AR, Mohammadi S, Rezaei M, Ashori S, Hossien Pour F 2013). Effective selection criteria for assessing drought tolerance indices in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) accessions. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production, 4 (4):813-821.
  • Farshadfar F, Sutka J 2002. Screening drought tolrerance criteria in maize. Acta Agron. Hung., 50(4):411-416.
  • Farshadfar E, Poursiahbidi MM, Safavi SM 2013. Assessment of drought tolerance in land races of bread wheat based on resistance/tolerance indices. International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research, 1(2):143-158.
  • Fernandez GCJ 1992. Effective selection criteria for assess- ing plant stress tolerance”, In: C.G. Kuo, editor, Adaptation of Food Crops to Temperature and Water Stress: Proceedings of an International Symposium, Taiwan. 13- 18 Aug. 1992. Asian Vegetable Res. and Dev. Ctr., Shanhua, Tainan, pp 257-270.
  • Fischer AT, Maurer R 1978. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. I. Grain yield responses Aust. J. Agric Res, 29: 897-912.
  • Ganjali A, Bagheri A, Porsa H 2009. Evaluation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) germplasm for drought resistance. Journal of Agronomic Research of Iran, 7(1):183-194.
  • Gavuzzi P, Rizza F, Palumbo M, Campaline RG, Ricciardi GL, Borghi B 1997. Evaluation of field and laboratory predictors of drought and heat tolerance in winter cereals. Can. J. Plant Sci., 77:523-531.
  • Gholinezhad, E., Darvishzadeh, R., Bernousi, I 2014, “Evaluation of Drought Tolerance Indices for Selection of Confectionery Sunflower (Helianthus anuus L.) Landraces under Various Environmental Condition”, Not Bot Horti Agrobo, 42(1):187-201.
  • Gholipouri A, Sedghi M, Sharifi RS, NM Nazari 2009. Evaluation of drought tolerance indices and their relationship with grain yield in wheat cultivars. Recent Res.Sci. Technol., 1(4):195-198.
  • Golabadi M, Arzani A, Mirmohammadi SAM 2006. Assessment of drought tolerance in segregating popula- tions in durum wheat. Afr. J. Agric. Res, 1:162-171
  • Golestani-Araghi S, Assad MT 1998. Evaluation of four screening techniques for drought resistance and their rela- tionship to yield reduction ratio in wheat. Euphytica, 103: 293-299.
  • Güngör Y, Erözel AZ, Yıldırım O 2004. Sulama Kitabı. Ankara Üniversitesi. Ziraat Fakültesi. Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama Bölümü. Yayın No:1592.s:291.
  • Howell TA, Musick JT, Tolk JA, 1986. Canopy Temperature of Irrigated Winter Wheat. Transaction of ASAE Vol. 29 (6).:1692–1699.
  • Jabbari H, Akbari GA, Daneshian J, Alahdadi I, Shahbazian N 2008. Utilization ability of drought resistance indices in sunflower (Heliantus annus L.) hybrids. EJCP 1(4):1-17.
  • James LG 1988. Principles of Farm Irrigation System Design. John Wiley and Sons. Inc. New York. 543s.
  • Kaçar MM, Ünlü M 2008. Farklı Su ve Gübre Sistemlerinin Pamuk Bitkisinde Su Stres İndeksinin Değişiminin İncelenmesi. ÇÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19(2):22-34.
  • Karimizadeh R, Mohammadi M, Ghaffaripour S, Karimpour F, Shefazadeh MK 2011. Evaluation of physiological screening techniques for drought-resistant breeding of durum wheat genotypes in Iran. Afr. J. Biotechnol., 10:12107-12117.
  • Khalili M, Naghavi MR, Pour Aboughadareh AR, Talebzadeh SJ 2012. Evaluating of drought stress tolerance based on selection indices in spring canola cultivars (Brassica napus L.). Journal of Agricultural Science, 4(11):78-85.
  • Kristin AS, Senra RR, Perez FI, Enriquez BC, Gallegos JAA, Vallego PR, Wassimi N, Kelley JD 1997. Improving common bean performance under drought stres. Crop Sci., 37: 43-50.
  • Maya F 2007. Farklı Su ve Gübre Sistemlerinde Pamuk Bitkisinde Yaprak Su Potansiyelinin Değişimi. Çukurova Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama Anabilim Dalı, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adana, s: 44.
  • Mitra J 2001. Genetics and geetic improvement of drought resistance in crop plants. Curr. Sci., 80:758-762.
  • Rosielle AA, Hamblin J 1981 Theoretical aspect of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Sci., 21: 943-946.
  • Sabaghina N, Janmohammadi M 2014. Evaluation of selection for drought tolerance in some chickpea (cicer arietınum L.) genotypes. Acta Technologica Agriculturae, p.6-12. DOI: 10.2478/ata-2014-0002.
  • Safahani Langeroodi AR, Kamkar B, Ataei M, Teixeira Da Silva A 2013. Assessment of the response of sunflower cultivars to water shortage using various stress tolerance indices. Int J Agron Plant Prod., 4(7):1628-1636.
  • Singh C, Kumar V, Prasad I, Patil VR, Rajkumar BK. 2015. Response of Upland Cotton (G. hirsutum L.) Genotipypes to Drought Stress Using Drought Tolerance Indices. J. Crop Sci. Biotech., 19 (1): 53-59.
  • Tanrıverdi Ç, Alp A, Demirkıran AR, Üçkardeş F 2010. Assessment of surface water quality of the Ceyhan River basin, Turkey. Environ Monit Assess, (2010) 167:175–184.
  • Toorchi M, Naderi R, Kanbar A, Shakiba MR 2012. Response of spring canola cultivars to sodium chloride stres. In Annals of Biological Research, no. 2, pp. 312–322.

Kısıntılı Sulama Koşullarında Bazı Pamuk (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Genotiplerinin Kuraklık Toleransının Belirlenmesi

Yıl 2019, , 685 - 693, 31.10.2019

Mualla Keten , Hasan Değirmenci , Ramazan Şadet Güvercin

https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.509483
Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, sulama suyunda belirli oranlarda
kısıntı yaparak suyu daha verimli kullanmak ve kuraklığa toleransı yüksek pamuk
genotiplerini belirlemektir. Çalışmada 7 farklı genotip (Aday 1, Aday 2, Aday 3, Aday 4, Aday 5, Aday 6 ve
Aday 7) ve Stonville 468 pamuk çeşidi kullanılmıştır. Kuraklık
toleransını belirlemek için Stres Duyarlılık İndeksi (SSI), Verim Kararlılık
İndeksi (YSI), Verim Azalma Oranı (Yr), Verim İndeksi (YI), Toleranslılık
İndeksi (TOL), Ortalama Verimlilik (MP), Harmonik Ortalama (HM), Geometrik
Ortalama Verimliliği (GMP), Modifiye Edilmiş Stres Toleranslılık İndeksleri (K1STI-potansiyel
verim değerlerinden elde edilerek hesaplanan indeks, K2STI- stres
koşullarında elde edilen verim değerleriyle hesaplanan indeks) ve Stres
Toleranslılık İndeksi (STI) kullanılmıştır. HM,
MP, GMP, STI, K1STI indekslerinin stresli ve stressiz koşullarda
uygulanabilirliği Aday 4 genotipinde görülmüştür. En yüksek MP değeri,
Aday 6 genotipinde bulunmuştur.. En düşük
SSI indeksi Aday 2’de bulunmuş ve kuraklığa
toleranslı olduğunu göstermiştir. Ortalama karşılaştırma (LSD), temel
bileşenler analizi (PCA) ve kümeleme (Cluster) analizi sonucunda Aday 2
genotipinin kuraklığa yüksek oranda toleranslı olduğu görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Pamuk Kuraklığa duyarlılık indeksi Kısıntılı sulama Kümeleme analizi

Kaynakça

  • Anonim 2015. Kahramanmaraş Meteoroloji İl Müdürlüğü.
  • Anwar J, Subhani GM, Makhdoom H, Javed A, Mujahid H, Munir M 2011. Drought tolerance indices and their correlation with yield in exotic wheat genotypes. Pakistan J Bot, 43(3):1527-1530.
  • Akçura M, Partigoç F, Kaya Y 2011. Evaluating of drought stress tolerance based on selection indices in Turkish bread wheat landraces. The Journal of Animal &Plant Sciences, 21(4): 700-709.
  • Astel A, Tsakovski S, Barbieri P, Simeonov V 2007. Comparison of self-organizing maps classi- fication approach with cluster and principal com- ponents analysis for large environmental data sets. Water Research, 41: 4566–4578. doi:10.1016/j.watres.
  • Baloch MJ, Khan NU, J WA, Hassan G, Khakgwani AA, Soomro ZA, Veesar NF 2011. Drought tolerance studies through wssi and stomata in upland cotton. Pak.J.Bot., 43(5):2479-2484.
  • Blum A 1988. Plant breeding for stress environments. CRC Press, Florida. P.212.
  • Bouslama M, Schapaugh WT 1984. Stress tolerance in soy- bean. Part 1: evaluation of three screening techniques for heat and drought tolerance. Crop Sci., 24: 933-937. Drikvand R, Doosty B, Hosseinpour T 2012. Response of rainfed wheat genotypes to drought stress using drought tolerance indices. J Agr Sci, 4(7):126-131.
  • Eivazi AR, Mohammadi S, Rezaei M, Ashori S, Hossien Pour F 2013). Effective selection criteria for assessing drought tolerance indices in barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) accessions. International Journal of Agronomy and Plant Production, 4 (4):813-821.
  • Farshadfar F, Sutka J 2002. Screening drought tolrerance criteria in maize. Acta Agron. Hung., 50(4):411-416.
  • Farshadfar E, Poursiahbidi MM, Safavi SM 2013. Assessment of drought tolerance in land races of bread wheat based on resistance/tolerance indices. International Journal of Advanced Biological and Biomedical Research, 1(2):143-158.
  • Fernandez GCJ 1992. Effective selection criteria for assess- ing plant stress tolerance”, In: C.G. Kuo, editor, Adaptation of Food Crops to Temperature and Water Stress: Proceedings of an International Symposium, Taiwan. 13- 18 Aug. 1992. Asian Vegetable Res. and Dev. Ctr., Shanhua, Tainan, pp 257-270.
  • Fischer AT, Maurer R 1978. Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. I. Grain yield responses Aust. J. Agric Res, 29: 897-912.
  • Ganjali A, Bagheri A, Porsa H 2009. Evaluation of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) germplasm for drought resistance. Journal of Agronomic Research of Iran, 7(1):183-194.
  • Gavuzzi P, Rizza F, Palumbo M, Campaline RG, Ricciardi GL, Borghi B 1997. Evaluation of field and laboratory predictors of drought and heat tolerance in winter cereals. Can. J. Plant Sci., 77:523-531.
  • Gholinezhad, E., Darvishzadeh, R., Bernousi, I 2014, “Evaluation of Drought Tolerance Indices for Selection of Confectionery Sunflower (Helianthus anuus L.) Landraces under Various Environmental Condition”, Not Bot Horti Agrobo, 42(1):187-201.
  • Gholipouri A, Sedghi M, Sharifi RS, NM Nazari 2009. Evaluation of drought tolerance indices and their relationship with grain yield in wheat cultivars. Recent Res.Sci. Technol., 1(4):195-198.
  • Golabadi M, Arzani A, Mirmohammadi SAM 2006. Assessment of drought tolerance in segregating popula- tions in durum wheat. Afr. J. Agric. Res, 1:162-171
  • Golestani-Araghi S, Assad MT 1998. Evaluation of four screening techniques for drought resistance and their rela- tionship to yield reduction ratio in wheat. Euphytica, 103: 293-299.
  • Güngör Y, Erözel AZ, Yıldırım O 2004. Sulama Kitabı. Ankara Üniversitesi. Ziraat Fakültesi. Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama Bölümü. Yayın No:1592.s:291.
  • Howell TA, Musick JT, Tolk JA, 1986. Canopy Temperature of Irrigated Winter Wheat. Transaction of ASAE Vol. 29 (6).:1692–1699.
  • Jabbari H, Akbari GA, Daneshian J, Alahdadi I, Shahbazian N 2008. Utilization ability of drought resistance indices in sunflower (Heliantus annus L.) hybrids. EJCP 1(4):1-17.
  • James LG 1988. Principles of Farm Irrigation System Design. John Wiley and Sons. Inc. New York. 543s.
  • Kaçar MM, Ünlü M 2008. Farklı Su ve Gübre Sistemlerinin Pamuk Bitkisinde Su Stres İndeksinin Değişiminin İncelenmesi. ÇÜ Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 19(2):22-34.
  • Karimizadeh R, Mohammadi M, Ghaffaripour S, Karimpour F, Shefazadeh MK 2011. Evaluation of physiological screening techniques for drought-resistant breeding of durum wheat genotypes in Iran. Afr. J. Biotechnol., 10:12107-12117.
  • Khalili M, Naghavi MR, Pour Aboughadareh AR, Talebzadeh SJ 2012. Evaluating of drought stress tolerance based on selection indices in spring canola cultivars (Brassica napus L.). Journal of Agricultural Science, 4(11):78-85.
  • Kristin AS, Senra RR, Perez FI, Enriquez BC, Gallegos JAA, Vallego PR, Wassimi N, Kelley JD 1997. Improving common bean performance under drought stres. Crop Sci., 37: 43-50.
  • Maya F 2007. Farklı Su ve Gübre Sistemlerinde Pamuk Bitkisinde Yaprak Su Potansiyelinin Değişimi. Çukurova Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Tarımsal Yapılar ve Sulama Anabilim Dalı, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Adana, s: 44.
  • Mitra J 2001. Genetics and geetic improvement of drought resistance in crop plants. Curr. Sci., 80:758-762.
  • Rosielle AA, Hamblin J 1981 Theoretical aspect of selection for yield in stress and non-stress environment. Crop Sci., 21: 943-946.
  • Sabaghina N, Janmohammadi M 2014. Evaluation of selection for drought tolerance in some chickpea (cicer arietınum L.) genotypes. Acta Technologica Agriculturae, p.6-12. DOI: 10.2478/ata-2014-0002.
  • Safahani Langeroodi AR, Kamkar B, Ataei M, Teixeira Da Silva A 2013. Assessment of the response of sunflower cultivars to water shortage using various stress tolerance indices. Int J Agron Plant Prod., 4(7):1628-1636.
  • Singh C, Kumar V, Prasad I, Patil VR, Rajkumar BK. 2015. Response of Upland Cotton (G. hirsutum L.) Genotipypes to Drought Stress Using Drought Tolerance Indices. J. Crop Sci. Biotech., 19 (1): 53-59.
  • Tanrıverdi Ç, Alp A, Demirkıran AR, Üçkardeş F 2010. Assessment of surface water quality of the Ceyhan River basin, Turkey. Environ Monit Assess, (2010) 167:175–184.
  • Toorchi M, Naderi R, Kanbar A, Shakiba MR 2012. Response of spring canola cultivars to sodium chloride stres. In Annals of Biological Research, no. 2, pp. 312–322.
Toplam 34 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Konular Ziraat, Veterinerlik ve Gıda Bilimleri
Bölüm ARAŞTIRMA MAKALESİ (Research Article)
Yazarlar

Mualla Keten 0000-0001-7741-922X

Hasan Değirmenci 0000-0002-6157-816X

Ramazan Şadet Güvercin 0000-0002-6195-5762

Yayımlanma Tarihi 31 Ekim 2019
Gönderilme Tarihi 7 Ocak 2019
Kabul Tarihi 18 Nisan 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2019

Kaynak Göster

APA Keten, M., Değirmenci, H., & Güvercin, R. Ş. (2019). Kısıntılı Sulama Koşullarında Bazı Pamuk (Gossypium hirsutum L.) Genotiplerinin Kuraklık Toleransının Belirlenmesi. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım Ve Doğa Dergisi, 22(5), 685-693. https://doi.org/10.18016/ksutarimdoga.vi.509483

Cited By

Effects of foliar sulfur applications in cotton crop on stomatal conductance under water stress
Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.37908/mkutbd.806526

21082



2022-JIF = 0.500

2022-JCI = 0.170

Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi (International Peer Reviewed Journal)

       Dergimiz, herhangi bir başvuru veya yayımlama ücreti almamaktadır. (Free submission and publication)

      Yılda 6 sayı yayınlanır. (Published 6 times a year)


88x31.png 

Bu web sitesi Creative Commons Atıf 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

                 


Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi Tarım ve Doğa Dergisi
e-ISSN: 2619-9149