Genetic studies of genotypic responses to water stress in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/06/2016
Views (316) Download (8)

Genetic studies of genotypic responses to water stress in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)

Sohail Kamaran, Muhammad Imran, Tariq Manzoor Khan, Muhammad Zeeshan Munir, Muhammad Adnan Rashid, Muhammad Atif Muneer
Int. J. Agron. Agri. Res.8( 6), 1-9, June 2016.
Certificate: IJAAR 2016 [Generate Certificate]


The present study was carried out to examine the potential in cotton germplasm for breeding water stress tolerant plant material, and understand the genetic basis of different morphological traits related to water stress tolerance. Portioned analysis of variance was employed to obtain good parents for this purposes. The parental genotypes MNH-512, Arizona-6218, CIM-482, MS-39, and NIAB-78 were crossed in complete diallel fashion and F0 seeds of 20 hybrids and five parents were planted in the field in randomized complete block design with three replications during 2010. Simple regression analysis of F1 data revealed that additive-dominance model was quite adequate for all morphological traits. The unit slope of regression lines number of bolls (b = 1.07 ± 9.14), boll weight (b = 0.99 ± 0.11), yield per plant (b = 0.96 ± 0.31), plant height (b = 1.10 ± 0.34), leaf area index (b = 0.82 ± 0.27), and ginning percentage (b = 1.01 ± 0.12) suggested that the epistatic component was absent in the inheritance of all characters studied. The result of various plant characters including seed yield showed drastic effects of water stress as compared with those assessed in non-stressed condition. Leaf area index in the analysis of variance suggested that additive variation was more important for the character. Narrow leaf varieties NIAB-78 and CIM-482 were water stress tolerant while varieties Arizona-6218, MNH-512 and MS-39 were broader leaf showing less resistant to water stress. The information derived from these studies may be used to develop drought tolerant cotton material that could give economic yield in water stressed conditions of cotton belt.


Ahmad  M,  Makhdum.  1992.  Effect  of  salinity-sodicity  on  different  phases  of  cotton  plant,  its fiber quality, and oil contents. Agricultural Review 13, 107–18.

Al-Hamdani SH, Barger TW. 2003. Influence of water stress on selected physiological responses of three sorghum genotypes. Italian Journal of Agronomy 7 (1), 15-22.

Ball RA, Oosterhuis DM, Mauromoustakos A. 1994. Growth dynamics of the cotton plant during water-deficit stress. Agronomy Journal 86, 788-795.

Cushman JC, Bohnert HJ. 2000. Genomic approaches to plant stress tolerance. Plant Biology 3, 117–124.

Hayman BI.1954a. The theory and analysis of diallel crosses. Genetics 39, 789-809.

Hayman BI. 1954b. The analysis of variance of diallel tables. Biometrics 10, 235- 244.

Heatherly LG, Russell WJ, Hinckley TM. 1977 Water relations and growth of soybeans in dry soil. Crop Science 17, 381–386.

Imran M, Shakee lA, Azhar FM, Farooq J, Saleem MF, Saeed A, Nazeer W, Riaz M, Naeem M, Javaid A. 2012. Combining ability analysis for within-boll yield components in upland cotton (Gossypiumhirsutum L.). Genetic and Molecular Research 11(3), 2790-2800.

Ingram J, Bartels D. 1996. The molecular basis of dehydration tolerance in plants. Plant Molecular Biology 47, 377–403.

Iqbal K, Azhar FM, Khan IA, Ullah E. 2011. Variability for drought tolerance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) and its genetic basis. International Journal of Agriculture and Biology 13, 61–66.

Jinks JL.1954. The analysis of continuous variation in diallel cross of Nicotiana rustica. Genetics 39, 767-788.

Khan MA, Myers GO, Stewart JMcD. 2002. Molecular Markers, Genomics and Cotton Improvement pp. 253-284. In M.S. Kang, crop, improvement Challenges in the Twenty- First Century.

Krieg DR. 1997. Genetic and environmental factors affecting productivity of cotton. Proceeding Belt wide Cotton Production Research Conference p. 1347.

Loffroy O, Hubac C. Vieira da Silva JB. 1983. Effect of temperature on drought resistance and growth of cotton plants. Physiologia Plantarum 59, 297-301.

Malik RS, Dhankar JS, Turner NC. 1979. Influence of soil water deficits on root growth of cotton seedlings. Plant and Soil 53, 109-115.

McMichael BL, Quisenberry JE. 1991. Genetic variation for root shoot relationship among cotton germplasm. Environmental and Experimental Botany 31, 461–470.

Pettigrew WT. 2004. Moisture deficit effect on cotton lint yield, yield components, and boll distribution. Agronomy Journal 96, 377-383.

Radin JW, Ackerson RC. 1981. Water relation of cotton plants under nitrogen deficiency. III. Stomatal conductance, photosynthesis and abscisic acid accumulation. Plant Physiology 67, 115-119.

Redid GHS, Reddi TY. 1995. Irrigation of principal crops in efficient use of irrigation water. 2nd Ed. Kalyani. Pub., New Dehli pp. 229-259.

Singh P. 2004. Cotton Breeding, 2nd Ed. Kalyani Publishers, New Delhi India.

Steel RGD, Torrie JH, Discky DA. 1997. Principles and Procedure of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach, 3rd Ed. McGraw Hill. Book. Co., New York, USA.

Turner NC. 1986. Crop water deficit: a decade of progress. Advances in Agronomy 39, 1-51.

Ullah I, Rahman M, Ashraf M, Zafar Y. 2008. Genotypic variation for drought tolerance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.): Leaf gas exchange and productivity. Flora 203, 105-115.

Vanschilfgaarde J. 1990. America’s irrigation “Can it last”? Civil Engg: ASCE 60(3), 67-69.

Yaseen SM, Rao MI. 2002. Skipped irrigation at critical growth stages and its effect on crop yields and soil salinity. Journal of Drainage Water Management 6, 37–44.