Indian Journal of Agricultural Research

  • Chief EditorV. Geethalakshmi

  • Print ISSN 0367-8245

  • Online ISSN 0976-058X

  • NAAS Rating 5.60

  • SJR 0.293

Frequency :
Bi-monthly (February, April, June, August, October and December)
Indexing Services :
BIOSIS Preview, ISI Citation Index, Biological Abstracts, Elsevier (Scopus and Embase), AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Indian Journal of Agricultural Research, volume 47 issue 3 (june 2013) : 200-206

PHYSIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF BRASSICA SPECIES DIFFERING IN DROUGHT TOLERANCE

Usha Rana *, Sonika Chaudhary
1Department of Biology and Environmental Sciences, College of Basic Sciences, CSKHPKV, Palampur – 176 062, India

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- * Rana Usha, Chaudhary Sonika (2024). PHYSIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF BRASSICA SPECIES DIFFERING IN DROUGHT TOLERANCE. Indian Journal of Agricultural Research. 47(3): 200-206. doi: .

ABSTRACT

An investigation was conducted to assess drought-tolerance in two Brassica species namely Brassica napus with varieties Sheetal and Neelam and Brassica carinata with varieties Jayanti and Kiran on the basis of inherent stress tolerance characters viz. plant dry weight (g/plant), root length (cm), leaf area (cm2/plant), relative water content (%),harvest index(%) and  drought susceptibility index (DSI).The experiment was designed by imposing water stress at branch initiation stage (45 DAS), floral bud initiation (60 DAS) and pod formation stage (100 DAS). All the treatments affected the performance of the varieties of Brassica napus and Brassica carinata. Variety Jayanti of Brassica carinata and variety Sheetal of Brassica napus exhibited significantly long root length compared to unstressed plants and less reduction in dry weight, leaf area, relative water content and harvest index. However, root length of variety Jayanti of Brassica carinata and Sheetal of Brassica napus exceeds that of unstressed plants in all the treatments of stress. It was observed that relatively higher amount of reduction in harvest index in Kiran (50 %) and Neelam (75 %) was observed however Jayanti and Sheetal are with minimum DSI.

REFERENCES

  1. Ashraf, M.Y.; Ala, S.A. and Bhatti, A.S. (1998). Nutritional imbalance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) genotypes grown at soil water stress. Acta Physiologia Plantarum, 20(3): 307-310.
  2. Ali, M.A.; Ohlsson, I.; Svensk, H.; Ohlsson, I and Kumar, P.R. (1990). Drought management. Research on rapeseed &mustard. Proceedings of an Indo-Swedish symposium, 4-6 Sept. 1989, Uppsala, Sweden, 49-67.
  3. Champlievier, L. and Merrien, A. (1996). Effects of water stress applied at different growth stages to Brassica napus L. Var. Oliefera on yield, yield components and seed quality. European J. of Agronomy, 5: 153-160.
  4. Colom, M.R. and Vazzana, C. (2003). Photosynthesis and PSII functionality of drought-resistant and droughtsensitive weeping lovegrass plants. Environ. Exp. Bot., 49: 135–144
  5. Donald, C.M and Hamblin, J. (1976). The biological yield & harvest index of cereals as agronomic and plant breeding criteria. Advances in Agronomy, 28: 361-905.
  6. Dhanda, S.S., Sethi, G.S.and Behl, R.K. ( 2004). Indices of drought tolerance in wheat genotypes at early stages of plant growth. J. Agron. Crop Sci., 190: 6–12.
  7. Fischer, R.A. and Maurer, R. (1978) Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars and grain yield responses. Australian J. Agric. Res. 29:897-912.
  8. Fischer, R.A. and Wood, J.T. (1979). Drought resistance in spring wheat cultivars. III. Yield association with morpho- physiological traits. Australian J. Agric. Res., 30: 1001–1020.
  9. Gupta, N.K.; Gupta, S. and Kumar, A. (2001). Effect of water stress on physiological attributes and their relationship with growth and yield of wheat cultivars at different stages. J. of Agronomy and Crop Sci., 186(1): 56-62.
  10. Joshi, M.D.; Malik, B.S. and Vyas, J.S. (1992). Association of seed quality of mustard with growth and yield components and its path analysis under irrigated conditions. Annals of Plant Physiol., 69 (1): 103-106.
  11. Karamanos, A.J. and Papatheohari, A.Y. (1999). Assessment of drought resistance of crop genotypes by means of the water potential index. Crop Sci., 39: 1792–1797.
  12. Khan, I.A.; Habib, S.; Sadaqat, H.A. and Tahir, M.H.N. (2004). Selection criteria based on seedling growth parameters in maize varies under normal and water stress conditions. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 6: 252–156.
  13. Lang-Youzhang;Hu-Jian;Yang-Jianchang;Zhang-Zujian;Zhu-quingsen.(2003).Morphological and anatomical traits in drought resistance rice roots.J.Youzhang-university,Agriculture and Life Sciences Edition. 24(4):58-61.
  14. Merah, O. (2001). Importance of water status traits for durum wheat improvement under Mediterranean conditions. J. of Agricultural Sciences, 137: 139-145.
  15. Misra, A.N.; Biswal, A.K. and Misra, M. (2002). Physiological, biochemical and molecular aspects of water stress responses in plants and the biotechnological applications. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. India, 72B: 115–134.
  16. Nayyar, H.; Gupta, D. (2006). Differential sensitivity of C3 and C4 plants to water deficit stress: association with oxidative stress and antioxidants. Environ. Exp. Bot. 58: 106-113.Morgan, T.M. (1984). Osmoregulation and water stress in higher plants. Annual Review of Plant Physio. 35: 299-131.
  17. Nelson, D.E.; Repetti, P.P.; Adams ,T.R.; Creelman, R.A.; Wu, J.; Warner, D.C.; Anstrom, D.C.; Bensen, R.J.; Castiglioni, P.P.; Donnarummo, M.G.; Hinchey, B.S.; Kumimoto, R.W. ; Maszle, D.R.; Canales, R.D.; Krolikowski, K.A.; Dotson, S.B.; Gutterson, N.; Ratcliffe, O.J. and Heard, J.E. (2007). Plant nuclear factor Y (NF-Y) B subunits confer drought tolerance and lead to improved corn yields on water limited acres. PNAS, 104: 16450–16455.
  18. Sawhney,V.; Singal, H.R.; Singh P.; Sawhney, S.K. and Singh, D.P. (1996). Pattern of plant relations and carbon dioxide exchange rates in contrasting genotypes of Brassica juncea under water deficit conditions. Indian J. of Plant Physiology, 1(3): 203-206.
  19. Shao,H.B.;Chu,L.Y.;Jaleel,C.A.;Manivannan,P.;Panneerselvam,R.;Shao,M.A.(2009). Understanding water deficit stress- induced changes in the basic metabolism of higher plants-biotechnologically and sustainably improving agriculture and the ecoenvironment in arid regions of the globe. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol., 29: 131-151.
  20. Torres,G.A.M.;Pflieger,S;,Corre-Menguy,F.;Majubert,C.,Hartmann,C.;Lelandis-Briere,C. (2006) Identification of novel drought related mRNAs in common bean roots by differential display RT-PCR. Plant Sci. 171:300-307.
  21. Turner, N.C. and Begg, J.E. (1981). Plant water relations and adaptation to stress. Plant Soil, 35: 97-131.
  22. Wilson, J.R.; Ludlow, M.M.; Fisher, M.J. and Schulze, E.D. (1980).Adaptation to water stress of the leaf relations of four tropical forage species. Australian J. Plant Physiol., 7: 207–220.
  23. Yang F and Miao L. F. (2010). Adaptive responses to progressive drought stress in two poplar species originating from different altitudes. Silva Fennica, 44: 23-37.
  24. Zhao, T. J.; Sun, S.; Liu, Y.; Liu, J. M.; Liu, Q.; Yan, Y. B.; Zhou, H. M. (2006).Regulating the drought-responsive element (DRE)-mediated signaling pathway by synergic functions of trans-active and transinactive DRE binding factors in Brassica napus. J. Biol. Chem., 281: 10752-10759.
Reviewed By

Download Article
In this Article
    Contact us
    Follow us

    Editorial Board

    View all (0)