Survey of the Effect of Different Irrigation Levels on Yield and Yield Components of Sensitive and Tolerant Cotton Cultivars

آب و خاک

Article 10, Volume 30, Issue 5 - Serial Number 49, November 2016, Pages 1415-1425   

Document Type: Research Article

DOI: 10.22067/jsw.v0i0.46506

Authors

hamid reza mehrabadi^* ; Ahmad Nezami¹; Mohammad Kafi²; Malihe Ahmadifard³

¹Faculty of Agriculture, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

³Islamic Azad University of Mashad

Abstract

Introduction: More plains of Iran are located in arid and semi-arid regions and so agricultural production systems depend heavily on water. Recently, the reduction of water resources has become a serious threat for crop production such as cotton planting. Therefore, application of low irrigation methods can be an appropriate method to cope with mentioned condition. In addition, it is vital to identify the cotton cultivars reaction to water deficiency. Sensibility of some cotton cultivars is lower than others. Sensitive cultivars seed cotton yield decreases more than tolerant cotton cultivars. Moreover, some of growth stages in cotton plant are more sensitive to water deficiency stress. For example, flowering stage is more sensitive than vegetative growth stage, and boll number per plant is more effective parameter on yield than boll weight. Ulla and et al (2) showed that there are genetic variations for drought stress toleration in cotton plant. Afshar and Mehrabadi (3) indicated that low irrigation on the basis of 50% and 75% of cotton water requirement had no significant effect on vegetative growth of cotton plant. However, it caused the increase of flower and boll shedding per plant. Application of tolerant cultivars compared with sensitive cultivars can increase seed cotton yield under drought stress condition. Consequently, the aim of this study is to survey yield and related morphological traits reactions in sensitive and tolerant cotton cultivars to different water deficiency levels.
Materials and methods: Two tolerant cotton cultivars (Armagan and Varamin) and two sensitive cotton cultivars (Coker349 and Nazili84) as a subplot at three irrigation levels (as a main plot) using split plot design based on complete block design with three replications were carried out at Agricultural Research Station of Kashmar in 2011. Three levels of water consumption based on Penman-Montith method and using cotton KC coefficients were [33% (I33%), 66% (I66%) and 100% (I100% of water requirement)] that it were take placed using drip irrigation method. Yield and yield components traits such as height, the number of boll per plant, boll weight, flower and boll shedding percent, seed cotton yield, biological yield, earliness percent and harvest index were determined at the end of experiment. Data analysis was carried out using Excel and MSTAT-C software.
Results and Discussion: The results showed that although water deficiency stress decreased vegetative components, the amounts of decreasing were higher in tolerant cultivars than sensitive cultivars but, by contrast, the reproductive components of tolerant cultivars indicated lower decreasing than sensitive cultivars under water deficiency stress. For example, Varamin cotton cultivar had more number of bolls per plant than Coker349 as a sensitive cultivar. The results also showed that more retention of boll number per plant was the main factor of cultivars difference as for seed cotton yield. The highest number of boll and flower per plant retention belonged to sensitive cultivars such as Coker349 and Nazili (71.2 and 69 percent, respectively) at 66 percent of water consumption and the lowest number of boll and flower per plant retention were 92.3 percent belonging to Varamin as a tolerant cotton cultivar at full water irrigation treatment. The results indicated that all yield components except boll weight were significantly affected by low irrigation levels. In addition, the results revealed that low shedding of flower and boll and accordingly more retention of boll number per plant and also biomass preservation under drought stress were the main factor in yield of tolerant cultivars in comparison with sensitive cultivars. Biological yield reduction was higher than seed cotton yield under water stress condition. High and significant correlation was observed among yields with boll number per plant, biological yield and harvest index under drought stress. Moreover, there was a significant correlation between yield with plant height and biological yield only in full irrigated treatment. Furthermore, harvest index decreased significantly under drought stress. Harvest index value for Coker349 was significantly lower than other cultivars. Coefficient correlation between harvest index and yield and its components showed that harvest index was more dependent with seed cotton yield to biological yield. Therefore, tolerant cultivars had higher seed cotton yield and also biological yield in comparison with sensitive cultivars. While there was a significant correlation between yield with plant height and biological yield only in full irrigated treatment.

Keywords

Correlation coefficient; Drought stress; Harvest index; water requirement; yield

References

Afshar, H., and Mehrabadi H.R. 2003. Investigation of different method of alternate furrow irrigation on water use and cotton responses. Final report of Agricultural Engineering Research Institute. P. 38. (in Farsi with English abstract).

2- Afshar, H., and Mehrabadi H.R. 2005. Cotton crop yield on micro irrigation (tape) system. Final report of Agricultural Engineering Research Institute. P. 40. (in Farsi with English abstract).

3- Bhat, J.G. 1996.Cotton physiology. Indian society for cotton improvement. India.

4- Ganotisi, N.D., and Angeles, H.L. 1990. Irrigation strategies for cotton under limited water supply. Cotton Research Journal. 3:20-31.

5- Jolaini, M., and Mehrabadi, H.R. 2009. Investigation on the effect of surface and subsurface drip irrigation methods and irrigation interval on the quality and quantity cotton. Final report of Agricultural Engineering Research Institute. P. 34. (in Farsi with English abstract)

6- Isoda, I.A. 2005.Adaptive responses of soybean and cotton to water stress II. Changes in CO2 assimilation rate, chlorophyll fluorescence and photochemical reflectance index in relation to leaf temperature. Plant Production Science. 8:131-138.

7- Kafi, M., Borzoee, A., Salehi, M., Kamandi, A., Masoumi, A. and Nabati, J. 2009. Physiology of environmental stresses in plants. Jahade Daneshgahi Mashad Press. Mashad. (in Farsi).

8- Mehrabadi, H.R., Nezami, A., Kafi, M., and Ramezani moghadam, M.R. 2015. Evaluation of morphophysiological raits in cotton cultivars (Gossypium hirsutum) under water deficiency stress at seedling stage. Iranian journal of Field Crop Research.

9- Morrow, M.R., and Krieg, D.R. 1990. Cotton management strategies for a short growing season environment: Water – nitrogen considerations. Agronomy Journal. 82:52-56.

10- Naseri, F. 1995. Cotton. Astan Ghods press. Mashad. (in Farsi).

11. Pilon-Smits, E.A.H., Ebskamp, M.J.M., Paul, M.J., Jeuken, M.J.W., Weisbeek, P.J. and Smeekens, S.C.M. 1995. Improved performance of transgenic fructan-accumulating tobacco under drought stress. Plant Physiology. 107:125–130.

12- Rahimian, M.H., And Kakhki, A. 2005. Water requirement and related plant coefficient KC by use of lycimetre at Kashamr region. Final report of Agricultural and Natural Resources Research Center of Razavi Khorasan. P. 45. (in Farsi with English abstract).

13- Ramezani moghadam, M.R. 2005. Determination of the best selection index for cotton species (Gossypium sp) under salinity stress and non- salinity stress conditions. PhD thesis. Islamic Azad university, science and research unit. Tehran, Iran. P. 138. (in Farsi with English abstract).

14- Reddy, V.R., Reddy, K.R., and Baker, D.N. 1991. Temperature effects on growth and developmentof cotton during the fruiting period. Agronomy Journal. 83:211-217.

15- Reddy, K. R., Hodges, H.F., and Reddy, V.R. 1992. Temperature effects on cotton fruit retention. Agronomy Journal. 84.21:26-36.

16- Rezaei, J., Mehrabadi, H.R., Setodemaram, K., and Nemati, M. 2005. Effect of planting date on shedding, yield and yield components of three cotton cultivars. Final report of Cotton Research Institute. P. 47. (in Farsi with English abstract).

17- Singh, Y., Singh Rao, S., and Regar, P.L. 2010. Deficit irrigation and nitrogen effects on seed cotton yield, water productivity and yield response factor in shallow soils of semi-arid environment. Agricultural Water Management. 97: 965–970.

18- Ston J.F., and Nofziger D.L. 1993. Water used and yield of cotton grown under wide- spaced furrow irrigation. Agricultural Water Management. 24:27-38.

19- Ullah, I., Rahmana, M.u., Ashraf, M., and Zafar, Y. 2008. Genotypic variation for drought tolerance in cotton(Gossypium hirsutum L.): Leaf gas exchange and productivity. Flora. 203:105–115.

20- Wells, R., and Meredith, W.R. 1984. Comparative growth of obsolete and modern cotton cultivars. III. Relationship of yield to observed growth characteristic. Crop Science. 24: 868-872.