Soil & Water Res., 2008, 3(10):S95-S104 | DOI: 10.17221/10/2008-SWR

Drought stress tolerance of two wheat genotypes

András Lukács, Géza Pártay, Tamás Németh, Szilveszter Csorba, Csilla Farkas
Research Institute for Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (RISSAC), Budapest, Hungary

Biotic and abiotic stress effects can limit the productivity of plants to great extent. In Hungary, drought is one of the most important constrains of biomass production, even at the present climatic conditions. The climate change scenarios, developed for the Carpathian basin for the nearest future predict further decrease in surface water resources. Consequently, it is essential to develop drought stress tolerant wheat genotypes to ensure sustainable and productive wheat production under changed climate conditions. The aim of the present study was to compare the stress tolerance of two winter wheat genotypes at two different scales. Soil water regime and development of plants, grown in a pot experiment and in large undisturbed soil columns were evaluated. The pot experiments were carried out in a climatic room in three replicates. GK Élet wheat genotype was planted in six, and Mv Emese in other six pots. Two pots were left without plant for evaporation studies. Based on the mass of the soil columns without plant the evaporation from the bare soil surface was calculated in order to distinguish the evaporation and the transpiration with appropriate precision. A complex stress diagnosis system was developed to monitor the water balance elements. ECH2O type capacitive soil moisture probes were installed in each of the pots to perform soil water content measurements four times a day. The irrigation demand was determined according to the hydrolimits, derived from soil hydrophysical properties. In case of both genotypes three plants were provided with the optimum water supply, while the other three ones were drought-stressed. In the undisturbed soil columns, the same wheat genotypes were sawn in one replicate. Similar watering strategy was applied. TDR soil moisture probes were installed in the soil at various depths to monitor changes in soil water content. In order to study the drought stress reaction of the wheat plants, microsensors of 1.6 mm diameter were implanted into the stems and connected to a quadrupole mass spectrometer for gas analysis. The stress status was indicated in the plants grown on partly non-irrigated soil columns by the lower CO2 level at both genotypes. It was concluded that the developed stress diagnosis system could be used for soil water balance elements calculations. This enables more precise estimation of plant water consumption in order to evaluate the drought sensitivity of different wheat genotypes.

Keywords: drought stress; wheat genotypes; gas metabolism; soil water content; stress diagnosis system

Published: December 31, 2008  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Lukács A, Pártay G, Németh T, Csorba S, Farkas C. Drought stress tolerance of two wheat genotypes. Soil & Water Res. 2008;3(Special Issue 1):S95-104. doi: 10.17221/10/2008-SWR.
Download citation

References

  1. Bartholy J., Pongrácz R., Gelybó Gy. (2007): Regional climate change expected in Hungary for 2071- 2100. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research, 5: 1-17. Go to original source...
  2. Campbell C.S. (2006): Response of the ECH2O EC-10 and EC-20 Soil Moisture Probes to Variation in Water Content, Soil Type, and Solution Electrical Conductivity. Application Note, Decagon Devices. Available at: www.decagon.com
  3. Csorba Sz. (2007): Studying of water regime of different wheat genotypes in a stress diagnosis system. [Ph.D. Thesis.] Szent István University, Gödöllő. (in Hungarian)
  4. Djilianov D., Georgieva T., Moyankova D., Atanassov A., Shinozaki K., Smeeken S.C.M., Verma D.P.S., Murata N. (2005): Improved abiotic stress tolerance in plants by accumulation of osmoprotectants - gene transfer approach. Biotechnology & Biotechnological Equipment, 19 (Special Issue): 63-70. Go to original source...
  5. Farkas Cs., Randriamampianina R., Majercak J. (2005): Modelling impacts of different climate change scenarios on soil water regime of a Mollisol. Cereal Research Communications, 33: 185-188. Go to original source...
  6. Gáspár L., Czövek P., Fodor F., Hoffmann B., Nyitrai P., Király I., Sárvári É. (2005): Greenhouse testing of wheat cultivators compared to those with known drought tolerance. Acta Biologica Szegediensis, 49: 97-98.
  7. Hagyó A., Farkas Cs., Lukács A., Csorba Sz., Németh T. (2007): Water cycle of different wheat genotypes under different water stresses. Cereal Research Communications, 35: 437-440. Go to original source...
  8. Hegedüs A., Erdei S., Janda T., Tóth E., Horváth G., Dudits D. (2004): Transgenic tobacco plants overproducing alfalfa aldose/aldehyde reductase show higher tolerance to low temperature and cadmium stress. Plant Science, 166: 1329-1333. Go to original source...
  9. Kikuta B.S. (2005): Selected methods of measuring drought stress in plants. In: 1st Biofix Workshop. May 31-June 1, 2005, Vienna. Available at: http://www.boku.ac.at/biofix/meetings-Dateien/VortraegeWorkshop/Selected_methods_of_measuring_drought_stress_in_plants.pdf
  10. Lukács A., Pártay G., Rajkainé Végh K. (2005): Measurements of CO2/O2 concentrations in the gas phase of soil-plant systems in potassium-feldspar treated sandy soil. Cereal Research Communications, 33: 263-266. Go to original source...
  11. Németh T., Pártay G., Buzás I., Mihályné H.Gy. (1991): Preparation of undisturbed soil monoliths. Agrokémia és Talajtan, 40: 236-242. (in Hungarian)
  12. Pant J., Berkasem B., Noppakoonwong R. (1998): Effect of water stress on the boron response of wheat genotypes under low boron conditions. Plant and Soil, 202: 193-200. Go to original source...
  13. Pártay G., Bujtás K., Lukács A., Németh T. (2000): Monitoring of direct and indirect effects of environmental pollutants on the gas phase of the plants by quadrupole mass spectrometry. Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, 38: 208-212.
  14. Rajkai K. (2004): Quantity, distribution and movement of water in the soil. [Ph.D. Thesis.] RISSAC HAS, Budapest. (in Hungarian)
  15. ©tekauerová V., Skalová J., ©útor J. (2002): Using of pedotransfer functions for assessment of hydrolimits. Plant Production, 48: 407-412. Go to original source...
  16. ©tekauerová V., Nagy V., Kotorová D. (2006): Soil water regime of agricultural field and forest ecosystem. Biologia, 61 (Suppl. 19): S300-S304. Go to original source...
  17. Szász G., (1997): The agrometeorology of agricultural water management. In: Szász G., Tőkei L. (eds): Meteorology for Agricultural Engineers, Horticulturalists and Foresters. Mezőgazda Publisher, Budapest, 411-470. (in Hungarian)
  18. Várallyay Gy. (2005): Life quality - soil - food chain. Cereal Research Communications, 34: 5-8.
  19. Varga-Haszonits Z. (1987): Agrometeorological Information and its Application. Mezőgazdasági Publisher, Budapest. (in Hungarian)
  20. Wi¶niewski K., Zagdańska B. (2001): Genotypedependent proteolytic response of spring wheat to water deficiency. Journal of Experimental Botany, 52: 1455-1463. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.