Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T22:01:55.882Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EFFECT OF DEFICIT IRRIGATION ON YIELD, RELATIVE LEAF WATER CONTENT, LEAF PROLINE ACCUMULATION AND CHLOROPHYLL STABILITY INDEX OF COTTON–MAIZE CROPPING SEQUENCE

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2013

T. SAMPATHKUMAR ,
B. J. PANDIAN ,
P. JEYAKUMAR  and
P. MANICKASUNDARAM
T. SAMPATHKUMAR*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
B. J. PANDIAN
Affiliation:
Water Technology Centre, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
P. JEYAKUMAR
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Physiology, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
P. MANICKASUNDARAM
Affiliation:
Water Technology Centre, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore 641003, Tamil Nadu, India
*
‡Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Water stress induces some physiological changes in plants and has cumulative effects on crop growth and yield. Field experiments were conducted to study the effect of deficit irrigation (DI) on yield and some physiological parameters in cotton and maize in a sequential cropping system. Creation of soil moisture gradient is indispensable to explore the beneficial effects of partial root zone drying (PRD) irrigation and it could be possible only through alternate deficit irrigation (ADI) practice in paired row system of drip layout that is commonly practiced in India. In the present study, PRD and DI concepts (creation of soil moisture gradient) were implemented through ADI at two levels of irrigation using drip system. Maize was sown after cotton under no till condition without disturbing the raised bed and drip layout. Relative leaf water content (RLWC) and chlorophyll stability index (CSI) of cotton and maize were reduced under water stress. A higher level of leaf proline content was observed under severe water-stressed treatments in cotton and maize. RLWC and CSI were highest and leaf proline content was lowest in mild water deficit (ADI at 100% crop evapotranspiration once in three days) irrigation in cotton and maize. The same treatments registered higher values for crop yields, net income and benefit cost ratio for both the crops.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 50 , Issue 3 , July 2014 , pp. 407 - 425
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, R. G., Pereira, L. S., Raes, D. and Smith, M. (1998). Crop evapotranspiration: guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Technical (Irrigation and Drainage) Paper 56, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.Google Scholar
Barrs, H. D. and Weatherley, P. E. (1962). A re-examination of the relative turgidity technique for estimating deficit in leaves. Australian Journal of Biological Science 15:413–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bates, L. S., Waldren, R. P. and Teare, I. D. (1973). Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 39:205–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackman, S. A., Obendorf, R. L. and Leopold, A. C. (1995). Desiccation tolerance in developing soybean seeds: the role of stress proteins. Physiologia Plantarum 93:630–638.Google Scholar
Brouwer, C. and Heibloem, M. (1986). Irrigation Water Management: Irrigation Water Needs. Training Manual No.3. Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
Dagdelen, N., Basal, H., Yilmaz, E., Gurbuz, T. and Akcay, S. (2009). Different irrigation regimes affect cotton yield, water use efficiency and fiber quality in western Turkey. Agricultural Water Management 96:111–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Darusman, A., Khan, H., Stone, L. R. and Lamm, F. R. (1997). Water flux below the root zone vs. drip-line spacing in drip-irrigated corn. Soil Science Society of American Journal 61:1755–1760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Du, T., Kang, S., Zhang, J. and Li, F. (2008). Water use and yield response of cotton to alternate partial root-zone drip irrigation in the arid area of north-west China. Irrigation Science 26:147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Hendawy, S. E., El-Lattief, E. A. A., Ahmed, M. S. and Schmidhalter, U. (2008). Irrigation rate and plant density effects on yield and water use efficiency of drip-irrigated corn. Agricultural Water Management 95:836–844.Google Scholar
El-Sharkawi, H. M. and Salama, F. M. (1997). Effect of drought and salinity on growth contributing parameters in wheat and barley. Plant and Soil 46:423–437.Google Scholar
Fereres, E. and Soriano, M. A. (2007). Deficit irrigation for reducing agricultural water use. Journal of Experimental Botany 58:147–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gadallah, M. A. A. (1995). Effect of water stress, abscisic acid and proline on cotton plants. Journal of Arid Environment 30:315–325.Google Scholar
Gencoglan, C., Gencoglan, S., Kırnak, H., Akbay, C. and Boz, I. (2005). Deficit irrigation analysis of cotton under Harran conditions. Proceedings of the 4th GAP (Southeastern Anotolia Project) Agricultural Congress, September 21–23, Turkey.Google Scholar
Gomez, K. A. and Gomez, A. A.(1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research. New Delhi, India: John Wiley, 680 pp.Google Scholar
Ibragimov, N., Evett, S. R., Esanbekov, Y., Kamilov, B. S., Mirzaev, L. and Lamers, J. P. A. (2007). Water use efficiency of irrigated cotton in Uzbekistan under drip and furrow irrigation. Agricultural Water Management 90:112–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kar, M., Patro, B. B., Sahoo, C. R. and Hota, B. (2004). Traits related to drought resistance in cotton hybrids. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology 4:377–380.Google Scholar
Kirda, C. (2002). Deficit irrigation scheduling based on plant growth stages showing water stress tolerance. In Deficit Irrigation Practice, 1–3 (Ed Kirda, C.), Water Reports 22. Rome, Italy: FAO.Google Scholar
Kirnak, H., Kaya, C., Tas, I. and Higgs, D. (2001). The influence of water deficit on vegetative growth, physiology, fruit yield and quality in eggplants. Bulgarian Journal of Plant Physiology 7 (3–4):34–46.Google Scholar
Li, L. and Staden, V. (1998). Effects of plant growth regulators on the antioxidant system in seedlings of two maize cultivars subjected to water stress. Plant Growth Regulation 25:81–87.Google Scholar
Lobato, A. K. S., Oliveira Neto, C. F, Costa, R. C. L., Santos Filho, G., Cost, R. C. L., Cruz, F. J. R., Neves, H. K. B. and Lopes, M. J. S. (2008). Physiological and biochemical behavior in soybean (Glycine max cv. Sambabia) plants under water deficit. Australian Journal of Crop Science 2:25–32.Google Scholar
Meena Kumari, S., Dass, Y. and Pawan, A. (2004). Physiological parameters governing drought tolerance in maize. Indian Journal of Plant Physiology 9:203–207.Google Scholar
Murty, K. S. and Majumder, S. K. (1962). Modification of the technique for determination of chlorophyll stability index in relation to studies of drought resistance in rice. Current Science 31:470–471.Google Scholar
NeSmith, D. S. and Ritchie, J. T. (1992). Maize (Zea mays L.) response to a severe soil water-deficit during grain filling. Field Crops Research 29:23–35.Google Scholar
Prichard, T., Hanson, B., Schwankl, L., Verdegaal, P. and Smith, R. (2004). Deficit Irrigation of Quality of Wine Grapes Using Micro-Irrigation Techniques. Davis, CA: University of California Co-operative Extension, Department of Land, Air and Water Resources, University of California, 5 pp.Google Scholar
Reddy, A. R., Chaitanya, K. V. and Vivekanandan, M. (2004). Drought-induced responses of photosynthesis and antioxidant metabolism in higher plants. Journal of Plant Physiology 161:1189–1202.Google Scholar
Sairam, R. K. (1994). Effect of moisture stress on physiological activities of two contrasting wheat genotypes. Indian Journal of Experimental Biology 32:594–597.Google Scholar
Sampathkumar, T. (2003). Evaluation of Drip and Surface Irrigation Methods with Rice Straw Mulching in Cotton. MSc thesis, Department of Agronomy, Agricultural College and Research Institute, TNAU, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India.Google Scholar
Smith, M., Kivumbi, D. and Heng, L. K. (2002). Use of the FAO CROPWAT Model in Deficit Irrigation Practice. Water Reports no. 22. Rome, Italy: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, pp. 17–28.Google Scholar
Song, F. B., Dai, J. Y., Gu, W. B. and Li, H. Y. (1995). Effect of water stress on leaf water status in maize. Journal of Jilin Agricultural University 18:1–6 (in Chinese).Google Scholar
Sivanappan, K. (1998). Sprinkler Irrigation in India. New Delhi, India: INCID.Google Scholar
Sivanappan, K. (2004). Irrigation and rainwater management for improving water use efficacy and production in cotton crop. Proceedings of International Symposium on Strategies for Sustainable Cotton Production – A Global Vision, 23–25 November, UAS, Dharwad, Karnataka, India.Google Scholar
Teixeira, J. and Pereira, S. (2006). High salinity and drought act on an organ-dependent manner on potato glutamine synthetase expression and accumulation. Journal of Experimental Botany 60:121–126.Google Scholar
Ueda, A., Shi, W., Shimada, T., Miyake, H. and Takabe, T. (2008). Altered expression of barley y-transporter causes different growth responses in Arabidopsis. Planta 227:277–286.Google Scholar
Veeraputhiran, R. (2000). Effect of Drip Irrigation and Fertigation on Growth and Yield of Hybrid Cotton. PhD thesis, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, India.Google Scholar
Vijayalakshmi, R. (2003). Micro-Sprinkler Irrigation and Fertigation and Land Configuration as a Best Management Technology Package for Groundnut. PhD thesis, Department of Agronomy, Agricultural College and Research Institute, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India.Google Scholar
White, S. C. (2007). Partial Rootzone Drying and Deficit Irrigation in Cotton for Use Under Large Mobile Irrigation Machines. PhD dissertion, The University of Southern Queensland, QLD, Australia.Google Scholar
Yancey, P. H., Clark, M. E., Hand, S. C., Bowlus, R. D. and Somero, G. N. (1982). Living with water stress: evolution of osmolyte systems. Science 217:1214–1222.Google Scholar
Yang, D., Shen, X., Zhao, T. and Ma, X. (2001). Achievement of drought-injury physiology in maize. Crops 5:1–4 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
Zhang, Z. H., Cai, H. J. and Yang, R. Y. (2004). Water requirements and crop coefficients of drip-irrigated crop under mulch in Minqin Vountry Oasis. Trans CSAE 20 (5):97–100.Google Scholar