Volume 11, Issue 30 (9-2019)
jcb 2019, 11(30): 23-36 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Mansouri I, Najafi Zarini H, Babeian Jelodar N, Pakdin A. (2019). Evaluation of Salt Tolerance in Some Canola (Brassica napus L.( Genotypes under Normal and Salt Stress Conditions. jcb. 11(30), 23-36. doi:10.29252/jcb.11.30.23
URL: http://jcb.sanru.ac.ir/article-1-829-en.html
URL: http://jcb.sanru.ac.ir/article-1-829-en.html
Sari of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University
Abstract: (3147 Views)
Salinity is one of the most important factors limiting the growth and production of plants around the world. Identification of tolerant cultivars and improving plant tolerance is the most effective method for increasing yield. In order to evaluate the relationship between agronomic and biochemical traits of canola and grouping of canola genotypes in salinity conditions, an experiment was conducted at Sari Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources University. The experiment was a factorial based on randomized complete block design with three replications. Factors included of 30 canola genotypes and two levels of salinity (0 and 12 ds/m-1). The evaluated traits include: height, the number of branches per plant, number of capsules per plant, capsule length, number of seeds per capsule, 1000-grain weight, dry weight of plant, leaf and seed sulfur, sodium / potassium ratio, chlorophyll content a and b, carotenoid content, percentage of oil, percentage of protein, Biological yield, harvest index and grain yield per plant. Genotypes in both conditions without salt stress and salinity stress showed significant differences for all traits. The effect of salinity and interaction between genotype and salinity were also significant on the above traits. The 30 genotypes of canola were classified by cluster analysis of Ward method into three separate groups in both conditions, without salt stress and salinity stress. The results of mean comparison showed that in the salinity conditions genotypes (28, 26,27,5, 2 and 24) showed the least and The genotypes (3, 22, 3, 6, 7, 16, 20, 21 and 30) showed the highest traits,such as, yield, harvest index, capsule length, number of seeds per capsule and 1000-seed weight. As a result, genotypes of the first group are introduced as sensitive and genotypes of the second group are introduced as tolerated. Factor analysis and biplots had a great similarity to the cluster analysis. According to the results, Salinity tolerant genotypes, can be used for future Plans of plant breeding.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2017/10/3 | Revised: 2019/09/17 | Accepted: 2018/01/27 | Published: 2019/09/11
Received: 2017/10/3 | Revised: 2019/09/17 | Accepted: 2018/01/27 | Published: 2019/09/11
References
1. Akbarpour, O.A., H. Dehghani, M.J. Rousta and A. Amini. 2015. Evaluation of some properties of Iranian wheat genotypes in normal and salt-stressed conditions using Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML). Journal Crop Research, 46: 57-69 (In Persian).
2. AOAC. 1995. Official methods of analysis (16th Ed). Washington, DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
3. AOCS. 1997. Official methods and practice of AOCS (5th Ed). Washington, DC: The American Oil Chemist Society.
4. Ali, N., F. Javidfar and A. Attary. 2002. Genetic variability, correlation and path analysis of yield and its components in winter rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Pakistan Journal of Botany, 34: 145-150.
5. Azimi Gandomani, M., A. Dehdari, H. Faraji, M. Movahhedi Dehnavi and M. Alinaghizadeh. 2012. Effects of salinity on some quantitative and qualitative characteristics of spring Rapeseed cultivars. Electronical Journal of Crop Production, 5: 53-70 (In Persian).
6. Bybordi, A., S.J. Seidtabtabai and A. Ahmadof. 2010. NaCl salinity effect on qualitative, quantitative and physiological attributes of winter canola (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Journal of Water and Soil, 24: 334-346.
7. Bybordi, A. 2010. Effects of Salinity on Yield and Component Characters in Canola (Brassica napus L.) Cultivars. Notulae Sciatica Biologic, 2: 81-83. [DOI:10.15835/nsb213560]
8. Basalma, D. 2011. The correlation and Path analysis of yield and yield components of different winter rapeseed (Brassica napus ssp. oleifera L.) cultivars Research .Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science, 4: 120-125.
9. Baradaran, R., A. Majidi harvan, F. Darvish and M. Azizi. 2006. Relationship between correlation and path coefficient analysis of yield in canola. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 12: 127-139.
10. Blumwald, E. 2004. Sodium transport and salt tolerance in plants. Department of Botany, University of Toronto, 25 Willcocks Street, Troronto, Ontario Mss 3b2, Canada, Utoronto, Ca. Current in Cell Biology, 12: 431-434. [DOI:10.1016/S0955-0674(00)00112-5]
11. Doganlar, Z.B., K. Demir, H. Basak and I. Gul. 2010. Effects of salt stress on pigment and total soluble protein contents of three different tomato cultivars. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5: 2056-2065.
12. Ehyai, M. and N. Behbahanizadeh. 1993. Description of soil analysis methods. Soil and Water Research Institute. Publication, Tehran, Iran, 893 (1).
13. Emam, Y., E. Hosseini, N. Rafiei and H. Pirasteh. 2013. Response of early growth and sodium and potassium concentration in ten barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivars under salt stress conditions. Crop Physiology Journal, 19: 5-15 (In Persian).
14. Farahani, E. and A. Arzani. 2009. Evaluation of genetic variation of durum wheat genotypes using multivariate analyses. Electronical Journal of Crop Production, 1: 51-64 (In Persian).
15. Faraji, A. and A. Hatamzadeh. 2009. Evaluation of Seed Yield Potential and Traits in Species of Brassica (B. napus, B. Rapa, B. juncea) under Rain Fed Conditions in Gonbad Area. Journal of Soil Water and Soil Science, 13: 47-52.
16. Fayaz. F. and R. Talebi. 2009. Determining relationships among yield and some yield components sing path analysis of field peas. Iranian Journal of Field Crops Research, 7: 137-143.
17. Ghanbari, A.A., H. Mozafari and H. Hassanpour Darvishi. 2017. Identification of Effective Traits on the Yield in bean Genotypes using Multivariate Statistical Methods. Journal of Crop Breeding, 9: 53-62.
18. Gosh, S.K. and S.C. Gulati. 2012. Genetic variability and association of yield components in Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.). Crop Research, 21: 345-349.
19. Jafari, A. 2001. Genetic distance of 29 permanent ryegrass genotypes by cluster analysis based on yield and morphological traits. Genetic modification of plants for forestry research. Research Institute of Forests and Range Publications. Tehran.
20. Jamil, M., S.H. Rehman and E.S. Rha. 2016. Salinity effect on plant growth, PSII photochemistry and chlorophyll content in sugar beet (Beta Vulgaris L.) and cabbage (Brassica Oleracea L.). Pakistan Journal of Botany, 39: 753-760.
21. Khayat, M., S. Lack and H. Karami. 2012. Correlation and path analysis of traits affecting grain yield of canola (Brassica napus L.) varieties. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research, 2: 5555- 5562.
22. Lee, S.C., M.H. Lim, J.A. Ki and S.I. Kim. 2008. Transcriptome analysis in Brassica Rapa under the abiotic stresses using Brassica 24K oligo microarray. Molecules and Cells, 26: 595-605.
23. Mendez, M.A., C. Hodar, C. Vulpe, M. Gonzalez and V. Cambiazo. 2002. Discriminant analysis to evaluate clustering of gene expression data. Federation of the European Biochemical Society, 52: 24-28. [DOI:10.1016/S0014-5793(02)02873-9]
24. Mittler, R. and E. Blumwald. 2010. Genetic engineering for modern agriculture: Challenges and perspectives. Annual Review of Plant Biology, 61: 443-462. [DOI:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112116]
25. Molazem, D. and J. Azimi. 2011. Effect of different levels of salinity on Leaf characteristics and chlorophyll content of commercial varieties of maize (Zea mays L.). Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Science, 5: 1718-1722.
26. Moameni, A. 2010. Geographical distribution and salinity levels of soil resources of Iran. Jornal of Soil Res. 24: 203-215 (In Persian).
27. Nazarbeygi, E., H.L. Yazdi, H.L, Naseri and R. Soleimani. 2011. The effects of different levels of salinity on proline and A-, B- chlorophylls in canola. American-Eurasian Journal of Agriculture and Environement Science, 10: 70-74.
28. Porra, R.G. 2002. The chequered history of the development and use of simultaneous equations for the accurate determination of chlorophylls a and b. Photosynthesis.Research, 73: 149-156.
29. Rahnama, A.A and A. Bakhshandeh. 2005. Effect of sowing dates and direct graining and transplanting methods on agronomic characteristics and grain yield of Canola under Ahvaz conditions. Iranian Journal of Crop Sciences, 7: 324-336.
30. Ramee, V. 2012. Correlation and factor analyses of quantitative traits in rapeseed (Brassica napus L.). Agriculture Innovations and Research, 1: 2319-1473.
31. Shahbazi, M., A.R. Kiani and S. Raeisi. 2011. Determination of salinity tolerance threshold in two rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) cultivars. Iranian Journal of Crop Science, 13: 18-31 (In Persian).
32. Saadia, M., A. Jamil, N.A. Akram and M. Ashraf. 2012. A Study of Proline Metabolism in Canola (Brassica napus L.) Seedlings under Salt Stress. Molecules, 17: 5803-5815. [DOI:10.3390/molecules17055803]
33. Solymanzadeh, H., N. Latifi and A. Soltani. 2007. Phenological and physiological traits associated with grain yield of Canola cultivars under rain fed conditions. Journal of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, 14: 67-76.
34. Tuncturk, M. and V. Ciftci. 2007. Relationships between yield and some yield components in rapeseed (Brassica napus ssp. oleifera L.) cultivars by using correlation and path analysis. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 39: 81-84.
35. Yasari, E., A.M. Patwardhan, V.S. Ghole, G.C. Omid and A. Ahmad. 2008. Relationship of growth parameters and nutrients uptake with canola (Brassica napus L.) yield and yield contribution at different nutrients availability. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 11: 845-853. [DOI:10.3923/pjbs.2008.845.853]
36. Yazdani, V., K. Davari, B. Ghahreman and M. Kafi. 2016. Modeling the effects of salinity and water deficit stress on growth and yield parameters of two cultivars of canola. Irrigation Science and Engineering, 38: 137-154 (In Persian).
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
