RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CANOPY ASSIMILATION SURFACE
CAPACITY TRAITS AND GRAIN PRODUCTIVITY OF WINTER WHEAT
GENOTYPES UNDER DROUGHT STRESS
V. V. Morgun, G. A. Priadkina, O. O. Stasik, O. V. Zborivska
Institute of Plant Physiology and Genetics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, 31/17, Vasylkivska Str., Kyiv, 03022, Ukraine
Received March 29, 2019 / Received April 25, 2019 / Accepted July 19 , 2019
Aim. A comparative analysis of several traits of the capacity of the assimilation apparatus of 10 varieties and 2
lines of winter wheat from Ukraine, under conditions of insuffi cient precipitation and elevated air temperature
during the period, when the reproductive organs formed (GS 30–49), in order to search for phenotypic markers
associated with high productivity. Methods. Field, morphometric, spectrophotometric and statistical methods
were used. Results. The maximum difference in yield between varieties and lines, which grew under condi-
tions of insuffi cient water supply and high temperatures in April and May of growing season 2017/2018, was
24.7 %. Under these conditions, the highest grain productivity was observed for the new varieties Pochayna,
Hospodarka and Kyivska 17 (8.60–8.73 t/ha) and a high canopy leaves chlorophyll index at late stages of
ontogenesis (0.38-0.48 g chlorophyll/m 2 at milky-wax ripeness). This was opposed to varieties Smuhlianka,
Poradnytsia and the line UK 392/15 with the lowest yield (7.00–7.25 t/ha) and assimilation surface at this stage
(0.07–0.17 g chlorophyll/m 2 ). At the fl owering stage (anthesis) the most productive varieties exceeded the least
productive ones, on average, by 30 % in leaves fresh weight of the canopy, by 24 % in content of total (a+b)
chlorophyll and by 60 % in canopy chlorophyll index. At milky-wax ripeness, the differences between these
varieties increased signifi cantly – up to 136 % in leaf fresh weight of canopy, 57 % in chlorophyll content and
350 % in canopy leaves chlorophyll index. A close positive correlation (r = 0.69–0.77, P ˂ 0.01) between the
canopy photosynthetic apparatus traits at milky-wax ripeness with the yield of varieties and lines of winter
wheat under drought and high temperature stress was found. Conclusions. The results show that the leaves
fresh weight of canopy and canopy leaves chlorophyll index can be used as markers of grain productivity of
winter wheat under drought stress, as well as for the possible development of molecular genetic criteria of
breeding, based on these phenotypic characteristics.
Triticum aestivum L., canopy assimilation surface, chlorophyll index, yield.
1. Shiferaw B, Smale M, Braun H-J, Duveiller E, Reynolds M, Muricho G. Crops that feed the world 10. Past successes and future challenges to the role played by wheat in global food security. Food Sec. 2013;5:291- 317. doi: 10.1007/s12571-013-0263-y.
2. Atar B. Determination and assessments the yield gap between the wheat yield and potential yield in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture - Food Science and Technology. 2018;6(10):1339-46. doi: 10.24925/turjaf. v6i10.1339-1346.1825.
3. Lv Z, Liu X, Cao W, Zhu Y. A model-based estimate of regional wheat yield gaps and water use effi ciency in main winter wheat production regions of China. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):6081. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-06312-x.
4. Dhungana P, Eskridge KM, Baenziger PS, Campbell BT, Gill KS, Dweikat I. Analysis of genotype-by-environment interaction in wheat using a structural equation model and chromosome substitution lines. Crop Sci. 2007; 47(2):477-84. doi:10.2135/cropsci2006.06.0425
5. Grogan SM, Anderson J, Baenziger PS, Frels K, Guttieri MJ, Haley SD, Kim K, Liu S, McMaster GS, Newell M, Prasad PVV, Reid SD, Shroyer KJ, Zhang G, Akhunov E, Byrne PF. Phenotypic plasticity of winter wheat heading date and grain yield across the US great plains. Crop Sci. 2016;56(5):2223-36. doi:10.2135/cropsci2015.06.0357.
6. Parry MAJ, Reynolds M, Salvucci ME, Raines C, Andralojc PJ, Zhu XG, Price GD, Condon AG, Furbank RT. Raising yield potential of wheat. II. Increasing photosynthetic capacity and effi ciency. J. Exp. Bot. 2011; 62:453-67.
7. Kiriziy DA, Stasik OO, Priadkina GO, Shadchina TM. Photosynthesis: CO2 assimilation and mechanisms of its regulation. Kyiv: Logos. 2014;2:480 p (in Russian).
8. Sadras VO, Calderini DF. Crop physiology: applications for genetic improvement and agronomy. Crop physiology. London, Academic Press. 2015:1-14. doi: 10.1016/B978- 0-12-417104-6.00001-7.
9. Foulkes MJ, Sylvester-Bradley R, Weightman R, Snape J. Identifying physiological traits associated with improved drought resistance in winter wheat. Field Crops Res. 2007;103(1):11-24. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2007.04.007.
10. Cattivelli L, Rizza F, Badeck FW, Mazzucotelli E, Mastrangelo AM, Francia E, Maré C, Tondelli A, Stanca AM. Drought tolerance improvement in crop plants: An integrated view from breeding to genomics. Field Crops Res. 2008; 105:1-14. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2007.07.004.
11. Chaves MM, Flexas J, Pinheiro C. Photosynthesis under drought and salt stress: regulation mechanisms from plant to cell. Ann. Bot. 2009;103(4):551-60. doi: 10.1093/aob/ mcn125.
12. Farooq M, Hussain M, Siddique KHM. Drought stress in wheat during fl owering and grain-fi lling periods. Critical Rev. Plant Sci. 2014;33(4):331-49. doi: org/10.1080/073 52689.2014.875291.
13. Nezhadahmadi A, Prodhan ZH, Faruq G. Drought tolerance in wheat. Sci. World J. 2013;1:610721. doi: 10. 1155/2013/610721.
14. Mwadzingeni L, Shimelis H, Dube E, Laing MD, Tsilo TJ. Breeding wheat for drought tolerance: Progress and technologies. J. Int. Agric. 2016;15(5):935-43. https:// doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(15)61102-9.
15. Zheng TC, Zhang XK, Yin GH, Wang LN, Han YL, Chen L, Huang F, Tang JW, Xia XC,He Zhonghu. Genetic gains in grain yield, net photosynthesis and stomatal conductance achieved in Henan Province of China between 1981 and 2008. Field Crops Res. 2011;122(3):225-33. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.03.015
16. Furbank RT, Quick WP, Sirault XRR. Improving photosynthesis and yield potential in cereal crops by targeted genetic manipulation: prospects, progress and challenges. Field Crop Res. 2015;182:19-29. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2015.04.009.
17. Gregersen PL, Culetic A, Boschian L, Krupinska K. Plant senescence and crop productivity. Plant Molec. Biol. 2013;82(6):603-22. doi: 10.1007/s11103-013-0013-8.
18. Kipp S, Mistele B, Schmidhalter U. Identifi cation of staygreen and early senescence phenotypes in high-yielding winter wheat, and their relationship to grain yield and grain protein concentration using high-throughput phenotyping techniques. Func. Plant Biol. 2014;41(3):227-35. doi: 10.1071/FP13221.
19. Priadkina GO, Maslyukivska OV, Stasik OO, Oksem VP. Relationships between leaves and canopy chlorophyll contents at grain fi lling and productivity of winter wheat. Plant Physiology and Genetics. 2015;47(2):167-74. http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/FBKR_2015_47_2_9.
21. Selyaninov GT. The origin and dynamics of droughts. Drought in the USSR. Their origin, repeatability and impact on the crop. By ed. AI. Rudenko. Leningrad, 1958:5-30 (in Russian).
22. Zadoks JC, Chang TT, Konzak CF. A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res. 1974;14:415-21. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3180.1974.tb01084.x.
23. Wellburn AP. The spectral determination of chlorophyll a and b, as well as carotenoids using various solvents with spectrophotometers of different resolution. J. Plant. Physiol. 1994;144(3):307-13. doi: 10.1016/S0176-1617 (11)81192-2.
24. Tarchevskiy IA, Andrianova YuE. The content of pigments as an indicator of wheat photosynthetic apparatus development power. Fiziologiya rasteniy. 1980; 27(2):341-47 (in Russian).
25. Dospehov BA. The method of fi eld experience. Moskva: Agropromizdat. 1985;351 p (in Russian).
26. Liu EK, Mei XR, Yan CR, Gang DZ, Zhang YQ. Effect of water stress on photosynthetic characteristics, dry matte translocation and WUE in two winter wheat genotypes. Agric. Water Management. 2016;167(31):75-85. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2015.12.026.
27. Reddy AR, Chaitanya KV, Vivekanandan M. Droughtinduced responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants. J. Plant Physiol. 2004; 161:1189-202.
28. Sharifi P, Mohammadkhani N. Effect of drought stress on photosynthesis factors in wheat genotypes during grain anthesis. Cer. Res. Comm. 2016;44(2):229-39. doi: 10.1556/0806.43.2015.054.
29. McDowell NG. Mechanisms linking drought, hydraulics, carbon metabolism, and vegetation mortality. Plant. Physiol. 2011;155(3):1051-59. doi: 10.1104/pp.110.170704.
30. Marček T, Hamow KÁ, Végh B, Janda T, Darko E. Metabolic response to drought in six winter wheat genotypes. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(2): e0212411.
31. Farooq M, Wahid A, Kobayashi N, Fujita D, Basra SMA. Plant drought stress: effects, mechanisms and management. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2009;29(1):185-212. doi: 10.1051/agro:2008021
32. Beed FD, Paveley ND, Sylvester-Bradley R. Predictability of wheat growth and yield in light-limited conditions. J. Agric Sci. 2007;145(1):63-79. doi: https://doi.org/10. 1017/S0021859606006678.
33. Sandaña PA, Harcha CI, Calderini DF. Sensitivity of yield and grain nitrogen concentration of wheat, lupine and pea to source reduction during grain fi lling. A comparative survey under high yielding conditions. Field Crops Res., 2009;114(2):233-43. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2009.08.003.
34. Xiao YG, Qian ZG, Wu K, Liu JJ, Xia XC, Ji WQ, He Zhonghu. Genetic gains in grain yield and physiological traits of winter wheat in Shandong Province, China, from 1969 to 2006. Crop Sci. 2012;52:44-56. doi: 10.2135/ cropsci2011.05.0246
35. Serrago RA, Alzueta I, Savin R, Slafer GA. Understanding grain yield responses to source-sink ratios during grain fi lling in wheat and barley under contrasting environments. Field Crops Res. 2013;150:42-51. doi: 10.1016/j. fcr.2013.05.016.
36. Reynolds MP, Pellegrineschi A, Skovmand B. Sink-limitation to yield and biomass: a summary of some investigations in spring wheat. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2005; 146(1):39-49. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-7348. 2005.03100.x.
37. Schnyder H. The role of carbohydrate storage and redistribution in the source-sink relations of wheat and barley during grain fi lling - a review. New Phytol. 1993;123(2):233-45. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469- 8137.1993.tb03731.x.
38. Ruuska SA, Rebetzke GJ, van Herwaarden AF, Richards RA, Fettell NA, Tabe L, Jenkins CLD. Genotypic variation in water-soluble carbohydrate accumulation in wheat. Funct. Plant Biol. 2006;33(9):799-809. doi: 10.1071/ FP06062.
39. Gepstein A, Banne I, Lifshitz Z, Blumwald E, Gepstein S. A new strategy for engineering drought tolerance in plant via auto-regulated expression of a key enzyme cytokinin synthesis. XVI Congress of the FESPB. 2008:p. S09-09, Tampere. doi: https://www.fespb.org/fi les/FESPB_2008_ ABSTRACT_BOOK.pdf
40. Spano G, Di Fonzo N, Perrotta C, Platani C, Ronga G, Lawlor DW, Napier JA, Shewry PR. Physiological characterization of «stay green» mutants in durum wheat. J. Exp. Bot. 2003;54(386):1415-20. doi: 10.1093/jxb/ erg150.
41. Luo PG, Zhan HY, Shu K, Wu XH, Zhang HQ, Ren ZL. The physiological genetics effects of 1BL/1RS translocated chromosome in «stay green» wheat cultivar CN17. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2009;89(1):1-10. doi: 10.4141/CJPS07072.
42. Borrill Ph, Fahy B, Smith AM, Uauy C. Wheat grain fi lling is limited by grain fi lling capacity rather than the duration of fl ag leaf photosynthesis: A case study using NAM RNAi Plants. PLoS One. 2015;10(8):e0134947. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0134947