Growth and yield performance of selected wheat varieties under water deficit conditions

Abstract

Effect of water deficit stress on growth and yield of three wheat (Triticum aestivum) varieties, viz. BARI Gom 25, BARI Gom 26 and Sourav was studied. Water deficit lowered the light interception at anthesis in wheat. Under water deficit condition, the highest amount of PAR interception was recorded in BARI Gom 26. The reduction of leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), relative growth rate (RGR) and net assimilation rate (NAR) were less in BARI Gom 26. Water deficit conditions lowered the SPAD values in all the three wheat varieties. BARI Gom 26 showed less reduction, while BARI Gom 25 reflected the highest reduction in SPAD value under water deficit condition. Under water deficit condition the maximum number of spikelets/spike, 1000-grain weight and HI were recorded in BARI Gom 26 and the minimum in BARI Gom 25. Under both control and water deficit conditions BARI Gom 26 gave the highest grain yield, while the lowest grain yield was obtained from BARI Gom 25.

Bazı Ekmeklik Buğday (Triticum aestivum L.) Çeşitlerinde Büyüme Analizine Yönelik Fizyolojik Özelliklerin Saptanması

“…In the maturation period, 9.36 g of day -1 ve and 7.62 g of day -1 are reduced to -9.84 g of day -1 in the ripening period (R 2 = 0.7912). Similar decreases were reported by Spitters and Kramer (1986) and Zaman et al (2016) by decreasing leaf area and decreasing photosynthesis capacity due to aging.…”

Effect of nitrogen and zinc management on growth, yield and economics of bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) varieties

“…Maximum CGR and LAI were also obtained with wheat variety Raj 4037. Zaman et al (2016) also reported that dry matter accumulation, crop growth rate and leaf area index were significantly influenced by different wheat varieties. Highest chlorophyll content in leaves was obtained in variety Raj 4037.…”

Changing methodology results in operational drift in the meaning of leaf area index, necessitating implementation of foliage layer index

“…Two general approaches to the derivation of LAIs are now apparent in the literature. The first uses actual measurements of leaf area (e.g., Camargo et al., ; Odum, Copeland, & Brown, ; Njuguna, Kamiri, Okalebo, Ngetich, & Kebeney, ; Zaman, Karim, Bari, Akter, & Ahmed, ). The second, of more recent origin, uses proxy measurements, such as light‐sensing, hand‐held scanners or remote‐sensing satellites (e.g., Clevers, Kooistra, & van den Brande, ; Kim et al., ; Verger, Filella, Baret, & Peñuelas, ).…”