Effects of Foliar Application of Methanol on Yield and Yield Components of Two Cultivars of Canola (Brassica napus L.) under Rainfed Conditions

پژوهشهای زراعی ایران

Article 5, Volume 16, Issue 3 - Serial Number 51, October 2018, Pages 629-640   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/gsc.v16i3.69265

Authors

K Ahmadi^{* 1}; M Rostami¹; S. R Hosseinzadeh²

¹Malayer University

²Behbahan Khatam Alanbia University of Technology

Abstract

Introduction
Canola (Brassica napus L.) is an annual plant of the Brassicaceae or Cruciferae family and is regarded as an important oil seed crop in the world. Water deficiency is one of the most limiting factors for plant growth and production in dry regions. The positive effects of methanol application on growth and yield of C3 plants under drought stress are well documented. Methanol can rapidly metabolize to water and CO2 in plant tissues and can affect dry matter accumulation by decreasing photorespiration. The foliar application of methanol also can stimulate the methyltrophic bacteria, indirectly. Methyltrophic bacteria usually live on plant leaves and consume some of the methanol on the leaves and affect plant growth via the production of different plant growth regulators such as auxin and cytokine.
Materials and Methods
To evaluate the effects of foliar application of methanol on yield and morpho-physiological characteristics of rapeseed cultivars under rainfed conditions a split plot experiment was conducted based on randomized complete block design (RCBD) with four replications. Experimental treatments were two cultivars of canola (Hayola 401 and Delgan) and four levels of methanol foliar application (control, 5, 10 and 15% of volume), respectively. In the stage of stem elongation, foliar application of methanol repeated 2 times with 10 days interval. At maturity, the plant height and number of lateral branches were measured. At the end of growth season, the plants were harvested by hand-cutting at the soil surface and subsequently, the number of pod per plant, number of seed per pod, 1000 seed weight, seed yield and aboveground biological yield of canola were determined.
Results and Discussion
The results showed that the effects of experimental treatments on plant height and numbers of lateral branches were significant. There was no significant different between cultivars for 1000 seed weight. For all of the studied traits Hayola 401 was better than Delgan cultivar. The highest amounts of 1000 seed weight, pod number per plant, seed number per pod, number of lateral branches and plant height were observed in treatment with 10% methanol. According to the results, the effect of experimental treatments and also the interaction of these treatments on the seed yield, biological yield and also harvest index were significant. The highest and lowest seed yield were observed in Hayola 401 cultivar treated with 10% methanol (1114 kg ha-1) and Delgan cultivar in the control condition (785 kg ha-1), respectively.
Conclusions
For all of the studied traits, the performance of Hayola 401 cultivar was better than Delgan cultivar. Although foliar application of methanol has positive effects on studied traits but the relationship between the dose of application and observed response was not linear and the highest amounts of seed yield, number of pod per plant, number of seed per pod, number of produced lateral branches and plant height were obtained in 10% (V/V) methanol. Therefore, application of methanol in concentrations higher than 10% is not recommendable.

Keywords

Biological yield; Crops; Drought stress; Harvest index

References

1. Abanda-Nkpwatt, D., Müsch, M., Tschiersch, J., Boettner, M., and Schwab, W. 2006. Molecular interaction between Methylobacterium extorquens and seedlings: growth promotion, methanol consumption, and localization of the methanol emission site. Journal of Experimental Botany 57 (15): 4025-4032.

2. Aslani, A., Vishekaei, M. N. S., Farzi, M., Niyaki, S. A. N., and Paskiabi, M. J. 2011. Effects of foliar application of methanol on growth and yield of mungbean (Vigna radiata L.) in Rasht, Iran. African Journal of Agricultural Research 6 (15): 3603-3608.

3. Emartpardaz, J., Hami, A., and Kazemnia, H. 2015. Effect of foliar application of methanol in water stress condition on yield components of Phaseolus vulgaris L. Agricultural Science and Sustainable Production Science 25: 125-137. (in Persian with English abstract).

4. Galbally, I. E., and Kirstine, W. 2002. The production of methanol by flowering plants and the global cycle of methanol. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry 43 (3): 195-229.

5. Hanson, A. D., and Roje, S. 2001. One-carbon metabolism in higher plants. Annual Review of Plant Biology 52 (1): 119-137.

6. Hosseinzadeh, S. R., Salimi, A., and Ganjeali, A. 2011. Effects of foliar application of methanol on morphological characteristics of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under drought stress. Environmental Stresses in Crop Science 4: 139-150. (in Persian with English abstract).

7. Ivanova, E. G., Doronina, N. V., and Trotsenko, Y. A. 2001. Aerobic methylobacteria are capable of synthesizing auxins. Microbiology 70 (4): 392-397.

8. Li, Y., Gupta, G., Joshi, J. M., and Siyumbano, A. K. 1995. Effect of methanol on soybean photosynthesis and chlorophyll. Journal of Plant Nutrition 18 (9): 1875-1880.

9. Makhdum, I. M., Nawaz, A., Shabab, M., Ahmad. F., and Illahi, F. 2002. Physiological response of cotton to methanol foliar application. Journal of Research (Science) 13: 37-43.

10. Mirakhori, M., Paknejad, F., Ardakani, M., Moradi, F., Nazeri, P., and Nasri, M. 2011. Effect of methanol spraying on yield and yield components of soybean (Glycine max L.). Agroecology 2 (2): 236-244. (in Persian with English abstract).

11. Mirakhori, M., Paknejad, F., Vazan, S., Nazeri, P., Reihani, Y., and Mortezapoor, H. 2010. Effect of methanol foliar application on yield and yield components of red bean. 11th Iranian Crop Science Congress. Environmental Sciences Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. (in Persian).

12. Muchow, R. C., Sinclair, T. R. and Bennett, J. M. 1990. Temperature and solar radiation effects on potential maize yield across locations. Agronomy Journal 82 (2): 338-343.

13. Nadali, I., Yarnia, M., Paknezhad, F., and Farahvash, F. 2016. Study of some qualititative and quantitative traits of sugar beet in response to foliar application of methanol and drought stress. Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences 8 (2): 169-187. (in Persian with English abstract).

14. Nonomura, A. M., and Benson, A. A. 1992. The path of carbon in photosynthesis: improved crop yields with methanol. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 89 (20): 9794-9798.

15. Ramberg, H., and Bradley, J. 2002. The role of methanol in promoting plant growth: an update. Plant Biochemistry and Biotechnology 1: 113-126.

16. Ramirez, I., Dorta, F., Espinoza, V., Jimenez, E., Mercado, A., and Peña-Cortes, H. 2006. Effects of foliar and root applications of methanol on the growth of arabidopsis, tobacco, and tomato plants. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 25 (1): 30-44.

17. Rowe, R. N., Farr, D. J., and Richards, B. A. J. 1994. Effects of foliar and root applications of methanol or ethanol on the growth of tomato plants (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill). New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science 22 (3): 335-337.

18. Sabokrow Foomany, K., Safarzadeh, M. N., Daneshian, J., Ranjbar Choobeh, N., and Sabokrow Foomany, K. 2011. Studing the effect of time and values of methanol foliation on quality and quantity yield flue-cured tobacco of cocker 347 type in Ahmadgurab region of Rasht. Journal of Plan Production 18 (3): 17-30. (in Persian with English abstract).

19. Taherabadi, S., Parsa, M., and Nezami, A. 2015. Effects of irrigation and foliar application of methanol on growth indices of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). Environmental Stresses in Crop Sciences 7 (2): 273-276. (in Persian with English abstract).

20. Zbieć, I., Karczmarczyk, S., and Podsiadło, C. 2003. Response of some cultivated plants to methanol as compared to supplemental irrigation. Electronic Journal of Polish Agricultural Universities 6 (1): 1-7.