Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Tolerance to drought at flowering stage of 28 maize hybrids and populations [electronic resource].

By:

Al-Naggar, A. M. M

Contributor(s):

Language: English Summary language: Arabic Description: p.69-87Other title:

تحمل الجفاف فى مرحلة التزهير لعدد 28 هجين وعشيرة من الذرة الشامية [Added title page title]

Uniform titles:

Egyptian journal of plant breeding, 2011 v. 15 (1) [electronic resource].

Subject(s):

Online resources:

Full Text Article.

In: Egyptian Journal of Plant Breeding 2011.v.15(1)Summary: In order to identify genotypes of high water efficiency and responsiveness, this study was conducted to determine the differential performance under drought stress and non-stress conditions at flowering stage among 3 groups of maize genotypes of narrow¬(single crosses), medium- (3-way crosses) and broad- (populations) genetic base backgrounds in two seasons, i.e. 2009 and 2010. Performance of genotypes varied with water supply and season. Water stress caused significant decreases in grain yield/plant (GYPP), grain yield/fed (GYPF), ears/plant (EPP), kernels/plant (KPP), and 100-kernel weight (100 KW) and significant increase in anthesis-silking interval (ASI), barren stalks (BS), leaf rolling (LR) and leaf senescence (LS). The largest reduction was reached by GYPP (≈38 %), but the largest increase was reached by LR ( ≈311 %) as a result of water stress. Narrow genetic base genotypes exhibited the highest means for GYPP and GYPP. Medium- and broad- genetic base genotypes came in the rd and 3,d rank, respectively for same traits. Superiority of tolerant (T) over sensitive (S) genotypes under drought in GYPP (118.3 %) was due to superiority in allyield components, i.e. KPP (25.78 %), EPP (24.71 %) and 100KW (3.89 %) as well as in drought adaptive traits, i.e. lower values in BS, LR, LS, ASI, days to anthesis and to silking and plant and ear height. Single crosses SC 128, SC Ageeb, SC 101, SC 124, followed by SC 30D80, SC 3062, SC 30K08, and SC 10 were considered water efficient and responsive, while most of populations were considered non-efficient and non-responsive. The superiority of SC 128, SC /01 and SC 3062 in GYPP could be attributed to superiority in EPP, KPP, ASI and LS while superiority in GYPP of sc D80 and SC 30K08 could be due to superiority in ASI and LS and that of SC 10 due to superiority in EPP and KPP. Further studies should be conducted to determine the underlying plant mechanisms contributing to the water efficient selected hybrids of maize.

Average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)

No physical items for this record

Includes references.

In order to identify genotypes of high water efficiency and responsiveness, this study was conducted to determine the differential performance under drought stress and non-stress conditions at flowering stage among 3 groups of maize genotypes of narrow¬(single crosses), medium- (3-way crosses) and broad- (populations) genetic base backgrounds in two seasons, i.e. 2009 and 2010. Performance of genotypes varied with water supply and season. Water stress caused significant decreases in grain yield/plant (GYPP), grain yield/fed (GYPF), ears/plant (EPP), kernels/plant (KPP), and 100-kernel weight (100 KW) and significant increase in anthesis-silking interval (ASI), barren stalks (BS), leaf rolling (LR) and leaf senescence (LS). The largest reduction was reached by GYPP (≈38 %), but the largest increase was reached by LR ( ≈311 %) as a result of water stress. Narrow genetic base genotypes exhibited the highest means for GYPP and GYPP. Medium- and broad- genetic base genotypes came in the rd and 3,d rank, respectively for same traits. Superiority of tolerant (T) over sensitive (S) genotypes under drought in GYPP (118.3 %) was due to superiority in allyield components, i.e. KPP (25.78 %), EPP (24.71 %) and 100KW (3.89 %) as well as in drought adaptive traits, i.e. lower values in BS, LR, LS, ASI, days to anthesis and to silking and plant and ear height. Single crosses SC 128, SC Ageeb, SC 101, SC 124, followed by SC 30D80, SC 3062, SC 30K08, and SC 10 were considered water efficient and responsive, while most of populations were considered non-efficient and non-responsive. The superiority of SC 128, SC /01 and SC 3062 in GYPP could be attributed to superiority in EPP, KPP, ASI and LS while superiority in GYPP of sc D80 and SC 30K08 could be due to superiority in ASI and LS and that of SC 10 due to superiority in EPP and KPP. Further studies should be conducted to determine the underlying plant mechanisms contributing to the water efficient selected hybrids of maize.

Summary in Arabic.

There are no comments on this title.

to post a comment.