Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Agriculture in China

ISSN 1673-7334

ISSN 1673-744X(Online)

CN 11-5729/S

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front Agric Chin    2011, Vol. 5 Issue (4) : 443-449    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11703-011-1125-z
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Exploring influential plant traits for enhancing upland cotton yield under salt stress
Ghulam ABBAS1(), Tariq MANZOOR KHAN1, Jehanzeb FAROOQ2(), Abid MAHMOOD2, Rana Nadeem ABBAS3, Wajad NAZEER4, Amjad FAROOQ2, Zuhair HASNAIN5, Muhammad Naeem AKHTAR6
1. Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan; 2. Cotton Research Institute, Ayub Agricultural Institute, Faisalabad, Pakistan; 3. Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan; 4. Cotton Research Station, Old Shujaabad Road, Multan, Pakistan; 5. PhD Scholar Department of Agronomy, BZU, Multan, Pakistan; 6. Pesticide Quality Control Laboratory, Multan, Pakistan
 Download: PDF(121 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

This research was conducted to explore genetic material that can yield better under salt stress conditions. The experiment was laid out using 27 upland cotton genotypes in a RCBD 2 factorial arrangement with two replications. Saline water (NaCl at 20 dS/m) was applied after satisfactory emergence was achieved. The crop was raised to maturity and data relating to yield, fiber quality and ionic traits were recorded. Analysis of variance showed significant variations in the germplasm. Plant height, bolls per plant, boll weight, GOT%, staple length, staple strength, K+ and K+/Na+ ratio under salinity stress showed a highly significant correlation with seed-cotton yield. The highest direct effect on seed-cotton yield per plant was exhibited by bolls per plant and boll weight. The results from the correlation and path coefficient analyses revealed that although the K+/Na+ ratio had a strong positively significant association with seed-cotton yield, its direct effect on the seed-cotton yield was negative and thus selection on the basis of K+/Na+ may not be fruitful. Hence, only indirect selection through bolls per plant and boll weight may be effective in increasing the seed-cotton yield per plant under salinity stress.
Keywords cotton      genotypic correlation      path coefficients      yield traits      fibre traits      ionic traits     
Corresponding Author(s): ABBAS Ghulam,Email:abbas1434@yahoo.com; FAROOQ Jehanzeb,Email:jehanzeb1763@hotmail.com   
Issue Date: 05 December 2011
 Cite this article:   
Ghulam ABBAS,Tariq MANZOOR KHAN,Jehanzeb FAROOQ, et al. Exploring influential plant traits for enhancing upland cotton yield under salt stress[J]. Front Agric Chin, 2011, 5(4): 443-449.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fag/EN/10.1007/s11703-011-1125-z
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fag/EN/Y2011/V5/I4/443
SOVd.f.Plant height (cm)The number of bolls per plantIndividual boll weight (g)Yield per plant (g)GOT %Staple length (mm)Staple strength (tppsi)Fiber fineness (μg/inch)Na+K+K+/Na+ ratio
Replications139.1940.182**0.093**23.561**17.036*1.94241.0050.15*0.08664.2**0.50**
Accessions (Acc.)26596.664**6.571**0.082**68.32**16.94**10.008**34.581**0.092**1.73**8.29**0.19**
Concentrations? (Conc.)153616.51**332.63**23.63**10143.57**886.3**805.42**4855.1**3.94**327.4**37.3**34.6**
Acc. × Conc.2659.282**0.666**0.033**5.946*2.8120.643.3350.0052.29**1.200.20**
Error5410.1110.250.0053.0352.8240.9712.3130.0310.290.7680.025
Tab.1  Genotypic correlation coefficient estimates for various yield, fiber and ionic concentration traits in 9 parents and 18 F crosses grown in control level for L.
TraitsPlant height (cm)The number of bolls per plantIndividual boll weight (g)Fiber fineness (μg/inch)GOT%Staple length (mm)Staple strength (tppsi)K+/Na+ ratioNa+K+Yield per plant (g)
Plant height (cm)1.00-0.32**0.27*-0.22-0.050.35*0.47**0.070.32*0.54**-0.11
Number of bolls / plant-0.32*1.000.180.48**0.45**-0.010.32*-0.20-0.07-0.35*0.87**
Individual boll weight (g)0.27*0.181.000.27*0.66**0.56**0.45**-0.190.26*0.090.65**
Fiber fineness (μg/i)-0.220.48**0.27*1.000.07-0.73**-0.54**0.04-0.54**-0.60**0.52**
GOT %-0.050.45**0.66**0.071.000.58**0.63**0.06-0.23-0.150.76**
Staple length (mm)0.35*-0.010.56**-0.73**0.58**1.000.82**-0.120.170.090.29*
Staple strength (tppsi)0.47**0.32*0.45**-0.54**0.63**0.82**1.00-0.130.04-0.040.79**
K+/Na+ ratio0.07-0.200.190.040.06-0.12-0.131.00-0.74**0.53**-0.25*
Na+0.32*-0.070.26*-0.54**-0.230.170.04-0.74**1.000.180.09
K+0.54**-0.35*0.09-0.60**-0.150.09-0.040.53**0.181.00-0.21
Yield per Plant (g)-0.110.87**0.65**0.52**0.76**0.29*0.79**-0.25**0.09-0.211.00
Tab.2  Genotypic correlation coefficient estimates for various yield, fiber and ionic concentration traits in 9 parents and 18 F crosses grown in Control level for L.
TraitsPlant height (cm)Number of bolls per plantIndividual boll weight (g)Fiber fineness (μg/inch)GOT%Staple length (mm)Staple strength (tppsi)K+/Na+ ratioNa+K+Yield per plant (g)
Slant height (cm)1.000.54**0.53**-0.29*0.37**0.56**0.59**0.81**-0.73**0.51**0.55**
The number of bolls per plant0.54**1.000.81**0.150.99**0.48**0.44**0.80**-0.85**0.41**0.98**
Individual boll weight (g)0.53**0.81**1.000.100.88**0.50**0.48**0.69**-0.84**0.220.90**
Fiber fineness (μg/inch)-0.29*0.150.101.00-0.43**-0.57**-0.68**0.10-0.020.120.17
GOT%0.37**0.99**0.88**-0.43**1.000.45**0.090.77**-0.94**0.130.81**
Staple length (mm)0.56**0.48**0.50**-0.57**0.45**1.000.93**0.46**-0.50**0.180.51**
Staple strength (tppsi)0.59**0.44**0.48**-0.68**0.090.93**1.000.78**-0.75**0.27*0.69**
K+/Na+ ratio0.81**0.80**0.69**0.100.77**0.46**0.78**1.00-0.88**0.71**0.78**
Na+-0.73**-0.85**-0.84**-0.02-0.94**-0.50**-0.75**-0.88**1.00-0.30*-0.85**
K+0.51**0.41**0.220.120.130.180.27*0.71**-0.30*1.000.38**
Yield per plant (g)0.55**0.98**0.90**0.170.81**0.51**0.69**0.78**-0.85**0.38**1.00
Tab.3  Genotypic correlation coefficient estimates for various yield, fiber and ionic concentration traits in 9 parents and 18 F crosses grown in salinity of NaCl at 20 dS/m for L.
TraitsPlant height (cm)Number of bolls per plantIndividual boll weight (g)Fiber fineness (μg/inch)GOT%Staple length (mm)Staple strength (tppsi)K+/Na+ ratioNa+K+Genotypic correlation with yield per plant (g)
Plant height (cm)0.011-0.2620.155-0.0030.0030.027-0.0230.0180.064-0.097-0.106
Number of bolls/plant-0.0040.8160.1020.006-0.024-0.001-0.015-0.051-0.0150.0620.876**
Individual boll weight (g)0.0030.1470.5660.003-0.0340.044-0.050-0.0490.052-0.0170.665**
Fiber Fineness (μg/inch)-0.0020.3890.1550.012-0.004-0.0580.0260.011-0.1100.1060.525**
GOT%-0.0010.3710.3740.001-0.0520.0460.0260.017-0.0460.0270.763**
Staple length (mm)0.004-0.0100.318-0.009-0.0300.079-0.040-0.0300.034-0.0170.299*
Staple strength (tppsi)0.0050.2580.591-0.006-0.0330.065-0.048-0.0350.0090.0070.814**
K+/Na+ ratio0.001-0.161-0.1070.001-0.003-0.0090.0060.261-0.150-0.094-0.256*
Na+0.003-0.0580.146-0.0070.0120.013-0.002-0.1930.203-0.0310.086**
K+0.006-0.2820.053-0.0070.0080.0070.0020.1380.036-0.178-0.217
Tab.4  Genotypic path analysis estimates for various yield, fiber and ionic concentration traits in 9 parents and 18 F crosses grown in control level for L.
TraitsPlant height (cm)The number of bolls per plantIndividual boll weight (g)Fiber fineness (μg/inch)GOT%Staple length (mm)Staple strength (tppsi)K+/Na+ ratioNa+K+Genotypic correlation with yield per plant (g)
Plant height (cm)0.1060.4100.1870.0010.013-0.002-0.052-0.3860.1690.1100.556**
The number of bolls per plant0.0580.7550.284-0.0010.035-0.002-0.047-0.3800.1950.0880.985**
Individual boll weight (g)0.0560.6100.3520.0000.031-0.002-0.062-0.3260.1940.0490.901**
Fiber Fineness (μg/inch)-0.0310.1140.035-0.004-0.0150.0040.080-0.0450.0050.0250.168
GOT%0.0390.7500.3110.0020.035-0.0020.080-0.3640.2170.0280.812**
Staple length (mm)0.0590.3660.1770.0040.016-0.004-0.042-0.2170.1150.0390.513**
Staple strength (tppsi)0.1220.7870.4840.0070.003-0.004-0.045-0.5580.3360.0580.697**
K+/Na+ ratio0.0860.6050.2420.0000.027-0.002-0.053-0.4750.2030.1540.786**
Na+-0.078-0.638-0.2950.000-0.0330.0020.0650.417-0.231-0.064-0.855**
K+0.0540.3070.0790.0000.005-0.001-0.012-0.3380.0690.2160.378**
Tab.5  Genotypic path analysis estimates for various yield, fiber and ionic concentration traits in 9 parents and 18 F crosses grown in salinity of NaCl at 20 dS/m for L.
1 Ali Z, Khan A S, Khan I A, Azhar F M (2005). Heritability (h2b) estimates for NaCl tolerance in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). J Agri Soc Sci , 1(2): 126–128
2 Ali Z, Salam A, Azhar F M, Khan I A (2007). Genotypic variation in salinity tolerance among spring and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) accessions. S Afr J Bot , 73(1): 70–75
doi: 10.1016/j.sajb.2006.08.005
3 Anonymous (2010). Economic Survey of Pakistan. Govt. of Pakistan, Finance Division, Economic Advisory Wing, Islamabad
4 Ashraf M (2002). Salt tolerance of cotton: Some new advances. Crit Rev Plant Sci , 21(1): 1 -30
doi: 10.1016/S0735-2689(02)80036-3
5 Ashraf M, Ahmad S (2000). Influence of sodium chloride on ion accumulation, yield components and fibre characteristics in salt-tolerant and salt-sensitive lines of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Field Crops Res , 66(2): 115–127
doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(00)00064-2
6 Bhatti M A, Azhar F M (2002). Salt tolerance of nine Gossypium hirsutum L. varieties to NaCl salinity at early stage of plant development. Int J Agri Biol , 4: 544–546
7 Cha-um S, Supaibulwatana K, Kirdmanee C (2006). Water relation, photosynthetic ability and growth of Thai Jasmine rice (Oryza sativa L. ssp. indica cv. KDML 105) to salt stress by application of exogenous glycinebetaine and choline. J Agron Crop Sci , 192(1): 25 -36
doi: 10.1111/j.1439-037X.2006.00186.x
8 Dewey O R, Lu K H (1959). A correlation and path co-efficient analysis of components of crested wheat grass and seed production. Agron J , 51(9): 515–517
doi: 10.2134/agronj1959.00021962005100090002x
9 Flowers T J, Yeo A R (1995). Breeding for salinity resistance in crop plants; where next. Aust J Plant Physiol , 22(6): 875–884
doi: 10.1071/PP9950875
10 Gorai M, Ennajeh M, Khemira H, Neffati M (2010). Combined effect of NaCl-salinity and hypoxia on growth, photosynthesis, water relations and solute accumulation in Phragmites australis plants. Flora-Morphology, Distribution, Functional Ecology of Plants , 205(7): 462–470
doi: 10.1016/j.flora.2009.12.021
11 Grewal H S (2010). Water uptake, water use efficiency, plant growth and ionic balance of wheat, barley, canola and chickpea plants on a sodic vertosol with variable subsoil NaCl salinity. Agric Water Manage , 97(1): 148 -156
doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2009.09.002
12 Jampeetong A, Brix H (2009). Effects of NaCl salinity on growth, morphology, photosynthesis and proline accumulation of Salvinia natans. Aquat Bot , 91(3): 181–186
doi: 10.1016/j.aquabot.2009.05.003
13 Kent L A, Lauchli A (1985). Germination and seedling growth of cotton: salinity calcium interactions. Plant Cell Environ , 8(2): 115–159
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.1985.tb01223.x
14 Khan A A, McNeilly T, Azhar F M (2001). Stress tolerance in crop plants. Int J Agri Biol , 3: 250–255
15 Khan A N, Qureshi R H, Ahmad N, Rashid A (1995). Response of cotton cultivars to salinity in various growth development stages. Sarhad J Agric Res , 11: 729–731
16 Maas E V, Hoffman G J (1977). Crop salt tolerance-current assessment. J Irri Drain Div Civ Eng , 103: 115–134
17 Nadarajan N, Gunasekaran M (2005). Quantitative Genetics and Biometrical Techniques in Plant Breeding. New Delhi: Kalyani Publ.
18 Noor E, Azhar F M, Khan A A (2001). Diffeerences in responses of Gossypium hirsutum L. varieties to NaCl salinity at seedling stage. Int J Agri Biol , 3: 345–347
19 PCST (2003). Report of National Committee on Water Resources Development and Management. Pakistan Council of Science and Technology, Islamabad
20 Pervaiz Z, Afzal M, Xi S, Xiaoe Y, Ancheng L (2002). Physiological parameters of salt tolerance in wheat. Asian J Plant Sci , 1(4): 478–481
doi: 10.3923/ajps.2002.478.481
21 Qadir M, Shams M (1997). Some agronomic and physiological aspects of salt tolerance in cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). J Agron Crop Sci , 179(2): 101–106
doi: 10.1111/j.1439-037X.1997.tb00504.x
22 Qayyum M A, Malik D (1988). Farm production losses in salt affected soils. In managing soil resources proc. 1st. Nat. Cong on soil Sci, Oct: 6-8, 1985. Lahore, Pakistan , 356–364
23 Qureshi R H, Barrett-Lennard E G (1998). Saline Agriculture for Irrigated Land in Pakistan. A Handbook. ACIAR Monograph No.50. Canberra, Australia . 142
24 Saqib M, Akhtar J, Pervaiz S, Qureshi R H, Aslam M (2002). Comparative growth performance of five cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) genotypes against different levels of salinity. Pak J Agri Sci , 39(2): 69–75
25 Steel R G D, Torrie J H, Dickey D A (1997). Principles and Procedures of Statistics: A Biometrical Approach. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co., 204–251
26 Zhu J K (2001). Over expression of a delta-pyrroline-5-carboxylate synthetase gene and analysis of tolerance to water and salt stress in transgenic rice. Trends Plant Sci , 6: 66–72 11173290
doi: 10.1016/S1360-1385(00)01838-0
[1] Muhammad IQBAL, Mueen Alam KHAN. Response of cotton genotypes to planting date and plant spacing[J]. Front Agric Chin, 2011, 5(3): 262-267.
[2] Zhongxu LIN, Daojun YUAN, Xianlong ZHANG, . Mapped SSR markers unevenly distributed on the cotton chromosomes[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2010, 4(3): 257-264.
[3] Chengjin GUO, Jinfeng ZHAO, Cundong LI, Kai XIAO, Haina ZHANG, Chuanfan SUN, Juntao GU, . Identification of senescence-related genes by cDNA-AFLP in cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.)[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2010, 4(3): 308-316.
[4] Dongxiao LI, Cundong LI, Hongchun SUN, Wenxin WANG, Liantao LIU, Yongjiang ZHANG, . Effects of drought on soluble protein content and protective enzyme system in cotton leaves[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2010, 4(1): 56-62.
[5] Haina ZHANG, Fanghua ZHAO, Yuxin ZHAO, Chengjin GUO, Cundong LI, Kai XIAO. Establishment of transgenic cotton lines with high efficiency via pollen-tube pathway[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2009, 3(4): 359-365.
[6] Jingyan SUN, Weiming LI, Hanshuang ZHANG, Junli ZHAO, Xiaolin YIN, Li’an WANG. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration in glandless upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)[J]. Front Agric Chin, 2009, 3(3): 279-283.
[7] Ying ZHU, Shuna LI, Hongshui YUAN, Xiaojun GUO, Baocheng ZHU. Isolation and identification of the antagonistic strain DM-54 of Bacillus amyloliquefacien against Verticillium dahliae, and optimization of antifungal protein producing conditions[J]. Front Agric Chin, 2009, 3(1): 16-23.
[8] WU Yuxiang, CHEN Chongqian, GAO Yanhui, ZHU Shuijin, JI Daofan. Effect of plant preservation on the fertility and chromosome configuration of a quadri-specific hybrid derived from 4 cultivated cotton species[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2008, 2(4): 380-385.
[9] LI Zhikun, WANG Xingfen, ZHANG Yan, ZHANG Guiyin, WU Liqiang, CHI Jina, Zhiying MA. Assessment of genetic diversity in glandless cotton germplasm resources by using agronomic traits and molecular markers[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2008, 2(3): 245-252.
[10] LIU Diqiu, ZHANG Xianlong. Gene cloning: exploring cotton functional genomics and genetic improvement[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2008, 2(1): 1-9.
[11] ZHOU Guisheng, FENG Chaonian, ZHOU Qing. Physiological activities and expression of insecticidal protein in Bacillus thuringiensis transgenic cotton leaves subjected to high and low temperatures[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2007, 1(4): 382-388.
[12] WANG Xingfen, MA Jun, YANG Shuo, ZHANG Guiyin, MA Zhiying. Assessment of genetic diversity among Chinese upland cottons with Fusarium and/or Verticillium wilts resistance by AFLP and SSR markers[J]. Front. Agric. China, 2007, 1(2): 129-135.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed