Performance of canola genotypes under water availability and deficit in newly reclaimed soil

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/09/2016
Views (187) Download (4)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

Performance of canola genotypes under water availability and deficit in newly reclaimed soil

Kamal Hassan Ghallab, Mohamed Deswki Hassan Dewdar, Ahmed El-Sayed Khalaf, Maram Ahmed Galal
Int. J. Agron. Agri. Res.9( 3), 57-65, September 2016.
Certificate: IJAAR 2016 [Generate Certificate]

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine the effects of drought stress and the important genetic parameters on some canola genotypes. Thirteen genotypes were tested in a split plot design based on randomized complete block design with three replications in 2012- 2013 and 2013-2014 at the experimental Farm of the Faculty of Agriculture, Fayoum University. The results indicated that the analysis of variance for the studied nine traits showed significant and highly significant differences among irrigation intervals, genotypes and the interaction of irrigation x genotypes (I x G) in both seasons for all the traits except I x G interaction for seed index and oil percentage in the 1st season and seed yield per fed. In the 2nd season which exhibited non-significance differences. The means of irrigation treatments showed significantly reduction by increasing drought stress for all traits. The trait means under normal irrigation had higher values than those of drought conditions. The Mean performance of genotypes 12, 10, 11 and 9 responded in this respect to drought stress more than other genotypes. The phenotypic variance was greater than those of genotypic ones for all studied traits and the same trend for phenotypic and genotypic coefficient of variability. The heritability values were ranged from low to moderate values for most studied traits. Expected genetic advance (GA) values except for number of pods/ plant (high value) were low for all studied traits and Genetic advance as percent of mean seemed to be more important than GA values for further improvement in the tested genotypes.

VIEWS 2

Abbasian A, Shirani Rad AH. 2011. Investigation the response of rapeseed cultivars to moisture regimes in different growth stages. Journal of Central European Agricultural 12, 353-366.

Al-Jabouri HA, Miller PA, Robinson HF. 1958. Genotypic and environment variance and covariance in an Upland cotton cross of interspecific origin. Agronomy Journal 50, 633-636.

Allard RW. 1960. Principles of plant breeding. John Wiley and Sons, New York.

Alyari, HF, Shekari. 2000. Oil seeds. Amidi Press. Tabriz, p. 182.

Burton GW. 1952. Quantitative inheritance in grasses. Proceeding 6th International Grassland Congress I, 277-283.

FAO. 2000. Crops and Drops, Land and Water Development Division, FAO, Rome, Italy, pp. 24.

Ghallab KH. 2002. Selection in canola (Brassica napus L.) germplasm under conditions of newly reclaimed land.III. Drought tolerant selections. Annals of Agricultural Science Moshtohor 40, 1201-1212.

Gomez KA, Gomez AA. 1984. Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. 2nd Ed. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.

Hati KM, Mandal KG, Misra AK, Ghosh PK, Acharya CL. 2001. Evapo-transpiration, water use efficiency, moisture use and yield of Indian mustars (Brassica juncea) under varying levels of irrigation and nutrient management in Vertisol. Indian journal Agricultrual Science 74(6), 339-342.

Kandil AA, El-Mohandes Salwa I, Mahrous NM. 1994. Genotypic and phenotypic variability, heritability and enter-relationships of some characters in oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.). Assiutjournal of Agricultrual Science 25(3), 155-166.

Khalaf AEA. 2011. Backcrossing and selection in segregating generations of canola (Brassica napus L.). PhD thesis, Faculty of Agricultural, Fayoum University, Egypt.

Maleki A, Naderi A, Naseri R, Fathi A, Bahamin S, Maleki R. 2013. Physiological performance of soybean cultivars under drought stress. Bull. Enviromental Pharmacology Life Science l2(6), 38-44.

Moselev  G. 1983. Variation in the epicuticular wax content of white and red clover leaves. Grass Forage Scince 38, 201-204.

Panda BB, Bandyopadhyay SK, Shivay YS. 2004. Effect of irrigation level, sowing dates and varieties on yield attributes, yield, consumptive water use and water-use efficiency of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea). Indian Journal Agricultural Science 74(6), 339-342.

Passban-Eslam B, Shkiba MR, Neishabori MR, Moghaddam M, Ahmadi MR. 2000. Effects of water stress on quality and quantity characteristics of rapeseed. Irandian Journal Agriculture Science 10, 75-85.

Qifuma SH, Niknam R, Turner DW. 2006. Responses of osmotic adjustment and seed yield of Brassica napus and B. juncea to soil water deficit at different growth stages. Australian Journal Agricultural Research 57, 221- 226.

Rahnema AA, Bakhshandeh AM. 2006. Determination of optimum irrigation level and compatible canola varieties in the Mediterranean environment. Asian. Journal Plant science 5(3), 543-546.

Sharaan AN, Ghallab KH. 2002. Selection in canola (Brassica napus L.) germplasm under conditions of newly reclaimed land. I. Variability and genetic parameters in the base lines. Egyptian Journal Plant Breeding 6(2), 1-13.

Shirani Rad AH, Abbasian A, Aminpanah H. 2013. Evaluation of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) cultivars for resistance against water deficit Stress. Bulgarian journal of Agriculture Science 19(2), 266-273.

Shirani Rad AH, Shahsavari N, Jais HM, Dadrasnia A, Askari A, Saljughi M. 2015. Fall cultivar of rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) for reduction of damage due to late season drought. Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 85(1), 50–54.

Singh RK, Chaudhary BD. 1985. Biometrical methods in quantitative analysis. Kalyani. Publishers. New Delhi New Delhi, India.