Study of genetic parameters and relationships between agronomic and physiological traits in Kabuli type chickpea genotypes under drought stress

پژوهش‌های حبوبات ایران

Article 1, Volume 10, Issue 2, December 2020, Pages 12-23   

Document Type: Original Articles

DOI: 10.22067/ijpr.v10i2.66470

Authors

Hadi Afzali; Mehdi Mohayeji^* ; Hassan Farhbakhsh

Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran

Abstract

Introduction
Chickpea is one of the most important protein producing crops in the world and drought is the greatest limiting factor for its growth. In addition, chickpea plays crucial role in soil fertility because of the nitrogen fixation in its roots. The chickpea is mostly grown in semi-arid and arid zones or in the rain fed condition. Hence, more than 90% of chickpea growing area is drought prone. Under such conditions, usually the last part of reproductive phase of chickpea, faces water deficiency. Generally terminal drought stress is responsible for reduction in yield and biomass as well as physiological traits such as CO₂ assimilation, stomatal conductance, transpiration rate, membrane stability index (MSI) and water use efficiency (WUE). In this condition, stress avoidance ability, tolerance or stress escape is essential for drought resistance. Significant genetic variation exists in chickpea germplasms for terminal drought stress. Nowadays, different breeding methods used for improving chickpea drought tolerance such as Marker assisted selection, omics and mutation breeding. Besides these techniques, enough information about traits affected by drought stress, their genetic parameters and relationships with economic yield is necessary for breeding programs.
 
Materials & Methods
According to estimation of genetic variation, heritability and relationships between agronomic, morphological and physiological traits, 64 Kabuli type chickpea genotypes were sown under two normal and terminal drought conditions in two-separated 8×8 lattice design in Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman during 2015-2016 growing season. Normal irrigation applied until flowering stage. Water withdrawing was done at 50% of flowering stage. Agronomic traits such as days to secondary branch, days to flowering, days to maturity, plant height, leaflet numbers, seed yield, yield components, harvest index, seed filling period, seed filling rate measured. Chlorophyll content measured by the SPAD chlorophyll meter. Stomatal conductance and net photosynthesis were measured by CI-340 Handheld Photosynthesis System apparatus from Bio-Science Company. Data was analyzed by SPSS ver. 22. Estimation of genetic parameters and path analysis were performed for all significant traits in both normal and terminal drought stress.
 
Results & Discussion
Analysis of variance for genotypes determined significant differences for day to secondary branch, day to flowering, day to pod setting, 100 seed weight and seed filling period in normal condition. Genotypes showed significant difference for all traits except number of seeds per pod, biological yield, seed filling rate and the SPAD index in stress condition. According to the results of genetic parameter estimation for normal condition the highest amount of CVg was belonged to seed filling period, leaflet number and 100 seed weight, which were 11.1, 9.13 and 8.4, respectively. The highest amount of heritability in normal condition also was belonged to days to flowering and days to secondary branch, which were 68.47 and 68.44, respectively. The highest amount of CVg obtained in terminal drought condition for stomatal conductance and net photosynthesis, were 33.14 and 31.76 respectively. Stomatal limitation and reduction in photosynthesis are the most important factors for loss of yield during stress condition. Therefore, the usage of 
mentioned genetic diversity may improve future breeding program for drought condition. However, marker assisted selection methods might be helpful, according to moderate heritability of these traits (29.58 and 24.08, respectively). Result of path analysis in normal condition determined that seed-filing period had the most magnitude direct effect (0.527) and the large indirect effect (0.365) via number of seeds per plant on seed yield. The highest amount of direct effect (0.702) on seed yield belonged to rate of filling in drought condition as well. It seems that during terminal progressive drought stress, the ability of filling the seed rapidly is the key trait for tolerant genotypes according to limitation in the seeds filling period.
 
Conclusion
Terminal drought stress is one of two reasonable factors reducing chickpea yield. The result of analysis of variance for genotypes indicated significant differences for days to secondary branch, days to flowering, days to pod setting, 100 seed weight and seed filling period in normal condition. In addition to mentioned traits, significant difference was achieved for days to maturity, seed yield, and number of pods per plant, harvest index, net photosynthesis and stomatal conductance. The highest amount of CVg belonged to seed filling period, leaflet number and 100 seed weight. However, highest CVg belonged to stomatal conductance and net photosynthesis in drought stress condition. In practice, relatively high genetic variation for these traits might be a new insight for improving drought tolerance in chickpea. The high direct and indirect effects of seed filling rate on seed yield in path analysis suggested a strong relationship between these characters. Moreover, the magnitudes of both direct and indirect effect of seed filling rate via number of seed per plant were increased during stress condition. According to the results, some physiological traits such as stomatal conductance, net photosynthesis and seed filling rate might be valuable in future breeding programs.

Keywords

Heritability; Net photosynthesis; Stomatal conductance; Terminal Drought Stress

References

1. 2014. http://faostat.fao.org
2. Farshadfar, M., and Farshadfar, E. 2008. Genetic variability and path analysis of chickpea (Cicer arietinum) landraces and lines. Journal of Applied Science 8(21): 3951-3956.
3. Fayyaz, F., and Talebi, R. 2009. Determining relationships among yield and some yield components using path coefficient analysis in chickpea (Cicer arietinum). Iranian Journal of Agriculture Research 7(1): 135-141. (In Persian with English Abstract).
4. Ganjeali, A., Porsa, H., and Bagheri, A. 2011. Response of yield and morphophysiological characteristics of earliness chickpea genotypes (Cicer arietinum) under drought stress. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 2(1): 65-80.
5. Guler, M., Adak, M.S., and Ulukan, H. 2001. Determining relationships among yield and some yield components using path coefficient analysis in chickpea (Cicer arietinum). European Journal of Agronomy 14: 167-166.
6. Hassan, S.E., and Khaliq, I. 2008. Quantitative inheritance of some physiological traits for spring wheat under two different population density. Pakistanian Journal Botany 40:581- 587.
7. Jaleel, C.A., Manivannan, P., wahid, A., Farooq, M., Al-Juburi, H.J., Somasundaram, R., and panneerselvarm, R. 2009. Drought stress plants: A review on morphological characteristics and pigments composition. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 11: 100-105.
8. Kafi, M., and Mahdavi Damghni, 2000. Mechanisms of Environmental Stress Resistance in Plants. Pp, 467. (In Persian with English Abstract).
9. Kakaii, M., Moosavi, S.S., Abdolahi, M., and Farshdfar, A. 2015. Genetic diversity and heritability of yield and yield components in chickpea. Corp Production and Process Journal 5(16): 271-280. (In Persian with English Abstract).
10. Kanouni, H. 2016. Genetic variability, heritability, and interrelationships between seed yield and related components of chickpea genotypes under dryland conditions. Iranian Journal of Filed Crop Science 47(1): 163-155.
11. Kanouni, H., and Malhotra, R.S. 2003. Genetic variation and relationship between traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum) lines under dryland conations. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences 5(3): 185-194. (In Persian with English Abstract).
12. Mafakheri, A., Siosemardeh, A., Bahramnejad, B., Struik, P.C., and Sohrabi, Y. 2010. Effect of drought stress on yield, proline and chlorophyll contents in three chickpea cultivars. Australian Journal of Crop Science: 4(8):
13. Mallu, T.S., Mwangi, S.A., Nyende, A.B., Eanga Rao, N.V., Odeny, D.A., Rathore, A., and Kumar, 2015. Assessment of genetic variation and heritability of agronomic traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). International Journal of Agronomy and Agricultural Research 6(1): 77-88.
14. Mansourifar, S., Shaban, M., Ghobadi, M., and Sabaghpour, S.H. 2012. Assessment of grain filing trend in chickpea (Cicer arietinum) cultivars under drought condition. Iranian Journal of Pulses Research 10(3): 591-602.
15. Meena, H.P., Jokumar, H.D., Upadhyaya, C., Bharadwaj, S.K., chauhan,, Verma, K., and Rizvi, A.H. 2010. Chickpea mini core germplasm collection as rich sources of diversity for crop improvement. Sat Journal 8: 1-5.
16. Mohammadali-Pouryamchi, H., Bihamta, M.R., Peighambari,A., and Naghavi, M.R. 2012. Effect of terminal drought stress on grain yield and yield components of Kabuli chickpea genotypes Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences14 (3): 202-217. (In Persian with English Abstract).
17. Moucheshi, A., Heidari, B., and Dadkhodaie, A. 2010. Genetic variation and agronomic evaluation of chickpea cultivars for grain yield and its components under irrigated and rain fed growing conditions Iran Agricultural Research 29(1-2). (In Persian with English Abstract).
18. Rahbarian, R., Khavari-Nejad, R., Ganjeali, A., Bagheri, A., and Najafi, F. 2011. Drought stress effects on photosynthesis, chlorophyll fluorescence and water relations in tolerant and susceptible chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotypes. Acta Biologica Cracoviensia Series Botanica 53(1): 47-56.
19. Rehman, A.U., Malhotra, R.S., Bett, K., Tar'an, B., Bueckert, R., and Warkentin, T.D. 2011. Mapping QTL associated with traits affecting grain yield in chickpea under terminal drought stress. Crop Science 51(2): 450-463.
20. Singh, K.B, Geletu, B., and Malhotra, R.S. 1990. Association of some characters with seed yield in chickpea collection. Euphytica 49: 83-88.
21. Stallknecht, B., Perry,, Karnes, N.N., Bussan, A.J., and Rlesselman, J. 2001. Growing Chickpeas in Montana. Site of Bozeman University.
22. Subnashchandra, B., Lohithaswa, H.C., Desai, A.S., and Hanchinal, R.R. 2009. Assessment of genetic variability and relationship between genetic diversity and transgress ire segregation inter raploid wheat. Karnataka Journal of Agriculture Science 22: 36-38.
23. Tabasum, A., Saleem, M., and Aziz, I. 2010. Genetic variability, trait association and path analysis of yield and yield components in mungbean (Vigna radiate (L.) Wilczek). Pakistan Journal of Botany 42(6): 3915-3924.
24. Teng, S., Qian, Q., Zeng, D., Kunihiro, Y., Fujimoto, K., Huang, D., and Zhu, L. 2004. QTL analysis of leaf photosynthetic rate and related physiological traits in rice (Oryza sativa). Euphytica 135(1): 1-7.
25. Yucel, D.O., Anlarsal, A.E., and Rucel, C. 2006. Genetic variability, correlation and path analysis of yield, and yield components in chickpea (Cicer arietinum). Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 30: 183-188.
26. Zali, H., Farsadfar, E., and Sabaghpour, S.H. 2011. Genetic variability and interrelationships among agronomic traits in chickpea (Cicer arietinum) genotypes. Crop Breeding Journal 1(2): 127-132.