Drought tolerance of Five Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) Genotypes and Its Association with Other Traits under Moderate and Severe Drought Stress

Journal Title: Asian Journal of Advances in Agricultural Research - Year 2017, Vol 3, Issue 3

Abstract

There are genotypic differences in drought tolerance (DT) among quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) cultivars, and most of the known mechanisms of drought tolerance are encountered in this species. The objectives of the present investigation were to identify the most drought tolerant quinoa genotypes, to estimate the superiority of tolerant (T) over sensitive (S) genotypes and to identify the trait(s) of strongest association with DT. Five quinoa genotypes were evaluated in two seasons using a split plot design with five replications under three irrigation regimes, i.e. well watering (WW), water stress (WS) and severe water stress (SWS), achieving a field capacity of 95, 65 and 35%, respectively. The highest drought tolerance index (DTI) under WS and SWS was exhibited by the genotype CICA-17. Seed yield/ha (SYPH) of drought tolerant (T) genotypes was greater than the sensitive (S) ones by 31.8 and 43.6%, respectively under WS and SWS. Superiority of drought tolerant (T) over sensitive (S) quinoa genotypes in SYPH under SWS was due to its superiority in seed yield/plant and its components, water use efficiency, branches/plant, chlorophyll concentration index and leaf area. All studied inflorescence traits (inflorescence weight, diameter and length, 1000-seed weight, inflorescences/plant) were strongly inter-correlated and strongly correlated with DTI. They could be regarded as selection criteria helping plant breeder in selection programs for high drought tolerance if the heritability and genetic advance from selection for these traits are high.

Authors and Affiliations

A. M. M. Al-Naggar, R. M. Abd El-Salam, A. E. E. Badran, Mai M. A. El-Moghazi

Keywords

Related Articles

Genotype and Drought Effects on Morphological, Physiological and Yield Traits of Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.)

Studying genotypic variation in quinoa germplasm is a prerequisite to start a breeding program aiming at improving its productivity under water stress conditions. The objectives of this investigation were: (i) to evaluat...

Comparison of Variance Components Methods for One Way Random Effects Model in Cotton

In this study, emphasis is placed on comparing the variance components for one way model in cotton by ten methods: analysis of variance (ANOVA), Quasi-maximum-likelihood method (QML), Maximum-likelihood method (ML), Full...

Sensory Evaluation Assessment of Bread Produced with Composite Flour Fermented by Baker’s Yeast in Akure, Nigeria

This study investigated the functional properties of bread produced from composite flour (Wheat, Air potato and cassava) and comparatively evaluated the sensory acceptability of bread products fermented using Baker’s yea...

Sequence of Application Benomyl and Plant Extracts in the Control of Cowpea Anthracnose Caused by Colletotrichum lindemuthianum Sensu Lato

Field experiment was conducted to compare the efficacy of hot water extracts of Ricinus communis, Jatropha gossypifolia and Datura stramonium at three concentrations (65, 50 and 30%) with benomyl in the control of cowpea...

Daily Intake of Aflatoxin B1 and Ochratoxin a from Maize Grain (Zea mays L.) during the Storage with Lippia multiflora (Verbenaceae) and Hyptis suaveolens (Lamiaceae) Leaves in Côte d’Ivoire

The aim of this study was to monitor the sanitary quality during the storage of maize grains in polypropylene bags for 9 months containing leaves of Lippia multiflora and Hyptis suaveolens and to assess the risk of expos...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP337336
  • DOI 10.9734/AJAAR/2017/37216
  • Views 84
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

A. M. M. Al-Naggar, R. M. Abd El-Salam, A. E. E. Badran, Mai M. A. El-Moghazi (2017). Drought tolerance of Five Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) Genotypes and Its Association with Other Traits under Moderate and Severe Drought Stress. Asian Journal of Advances in Agricultural Research, 3(3), 1-13. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-337336