Response of cool-season grain legumes to waterlogging at flowering

Pampana, Silvia; Masoni, Alessandro; Arduini, Iduna

doi:10.1139/cjps-2015-0268

Cited by 39 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(40 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sensitivity of field pea to waterlogging is further highlighted by the detrimental effect on plant seed production, with values of 4 and 8% of controls for early- and late-waterlogging. Even waterlogging for 5 days at the beginning of flowering decreased seed production in field pea to 38% of controls (Pampana et al, 2016b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only some studies have analyzed the impact of waterlogging throughout the entire plant life-cycle, describing responses in vegetative growth and seed production. As examples: in wheat, 20 days of waterlogging on 3–4 leaf-stage plants resulted in a final dry mass and yield representing 95 and 90% of controls, respectively (Collaku and Harrison, 2002; Pampana et al, 2016a); in barley, plants attained 85 and 90% of controls in dry mass and yield when waterlogged for 20 days at 3–4 leaf-stage (Masoni et al, 2016); in rapeseed, 21 days of soil hypoxia, applied to 5-leaf stage plants, constrained growth as the stressed individuals attained 77% in dry mass and 73% in yield compared to the control (Leul and Zhou, 1998); in field pea, 5 days of waterlogging had a substantial impact on plant dry mass accumulation and seed production as, respectively, stressed plants attained 35–50% and 5–25% of controls (Jackson, 1979; Pampana et al, 2016b). Nevertheless, information on root and shoot growth rates during waterlogging and subsequent recovery is scarce, and studies to functionally link leaf physiological responses with growth (i.e., RGR) and seed production (but see Li et al, 2011 for wheat are few).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Waterlogging of Winter Crops at Early and Late Stages: Impacts on Leaf Physiology, Growth and Yield

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waterlogging is expected to increase as a consequence of global climate change, constraining crop production in various parts of the world. This study assessed tolerance to 14-days of early- or late-stage waterlogging of the major winter crops wheat, barley, rapeseed and field pea. Aerenchyma formation in adventitious roots, leaf physiological parameters (net photosynthesis, stomatal and mesophyll conductances, chlorophyll fluorescence), shoot and root growth during and after waterlogging, and seed production were evaluated. Wheat produced adventitious roots with 20–22% of aerenchyma, photosynthesis was maintained during waterlogging, and seed production was 86 and 71% of controls for early- and late-waterlogging events. In barley and rapeseed, plants were less affected by early- than by late-waterlogging. Barley adventitious roots contained 19% aerenchyma, whereas rapeseed did not form aerenchyma. In barley, photosynthesis was reduced during early-waterlogging mainly by stomatal limitations, and by non-stomatal constraints (lower mesophyll conductance and damage to photosynthetic apparatus as revealed by chlorophyll fluorescence) during late-waterlogging. In rapeseed, photosynthesis was mostly reduced by non-stomatal limitations during early- and late-waterlogging, which also impacted shoot and root growth. Early-waterlogged plants of both barley and rapeseed were able to recover in growth upon drainage, and seed production reached ca. 79–85% of the controls, while late-waterlogged plants only attained 26–32% in seed production. Field pea showed no ability to develop root aerenchyma when waterlogged, and its photosynthesis (and stomatal and mesophyll conductances) was rapidly decreased by the stress. Consequently, waterlogging drastically reduced field pea seed production to 6% of controls both at early- and late-stages with plants being unable to resume growth upon drainage. In conclusion, wheat generates a set of adaptive responses to withstand 14 days of waterlogging, barley and rapeseed can still produce significant yield if transiently waterlogged during early plant stages but are more adversely impacted at the late stage, and field pea is not suitable for areas prone to waterlogging events of 14 days at either growth stage.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Waterlogging of Winter Crops at Early and Late Stages: Impacts on Leaf Physiology, Growth and Yield

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As in early waterlogging, the root system was greatly affected by the end of the treatment, as a result of generalised root decay, and with no ability to recover by maturity. In this regard, Pampana et al (2016) observed that plants only reached 33% of controls in root length, and Cannell et al (1979) registered a root dry mass of 20% of controls at maturity.…”

Section: Field Peamentioning

confidence: 93%

Waterlogging differentially affects yield and its components in wheat, barley, rapeseed and field pea depending on the timing of occurrence

Ploschuk

Miralles

Colmer

et al. 2020

J Agronomy Crop Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waterlogging on croplands is increasing in various areas of the world. This study evaluated the yield penalty by early and late waterlogging on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) and field pea (Pisum sativum L.). Plants cultivated outdoors were exposed to a 14-day waterlogging during vegetative (at 65 days after sowing (DAS)) or reproductive (at 85/87 DAS) stages, followed by drained conditions until maturity. Yield (seed weight per plant) and its components (number of spikes/siliques/pods per plant, number of grains per spike/silique/pod and 1,000 grain weight) were assessed at maturity, along with morphological (number of tillers/branches) and shoot and root dry weight responses after waterlogging and during recovery. Wheat was the most tolerant species achieving 86% and 71% of controls in yield with early and late waterlogging, related to fewer grains per spike.Barley and rapeseed tolerated early waterlogging (yields 85% and 79% of controls) as compared to late waterlogging (32% and 26% of controls), mainly due to fewer spikes per plant (barley) or reductions in seeds per silique (rapeseed). Field pea was greatly affected by waterlogging at both timings, attaining a yield of only 6% of controls on average due to much fewer pods and fewer seeds per pod. So, wheat could be an option for areas facing either winter or spring transient waterlogging (i.e. early or late stages); barley and rapeseed are recommended only with if water excess occurs in early stages and field pea is intolerant to waterlogging. K E Y W O R D S flooding, grain production, tillering, winter crops S U PP O RTI N G I N FO R M ATI O N Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section. How to cite this article: Ploschuk RA, Miralles DJ, Colmer TD, Striker GG. Waterlogging differentially affects yield and its components in wheat, barley, rapeseed and field pea depending on the timing of occurrence. J Agro Crop Sci.

show abstract

“…This constitutes a major threat to regional crop production. Pea is very prone to WL, even more than other grain legumes (Solaiman et al, 2007; Pampana et al, 2016). In recent years, unseasonal rain during sowing exposed the pea crop to WL stress (Zaman et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Waterlogging Tolerance at Germination in Field Pea: Variability, Genetic Control, and Indirect Selection

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the Eastern Gangetic Plain of South Asia field pea ( Pisum sativum L.) is often grown as a relay crop where soil waterlogging (WL) causes germination failure. To assess if selection for WL tolerance is feasible, we studied the response to WL stress at germination stage in a recombinant inbred line (RIL) population from a bi-parental cross between WL-contrasting parents and in a diversity panel to identify extreme phenotypes, understand the genetics of WL tolerance and find traits for possible use in indirect selection. The RIL population and the diversity panel were screened to test the ability of germination under both waterlogged and drained soils. A total of 50, most WL tolerant and sensitive, genotypes from each of both the RIL and the diversity panel were further evaluated to assay testa integrity/leakage in CaSO 4 solution. Morphological characterization of both populations was undertaken. A wide range of variation in the ability to germination in waterlogged soil was observed in the RIL population (6–93%) and the diversity panel (5–100%) with a high broad-sense heritability ( H 2 > 85%). The variation was continuously distributed indicating polygenic control. Most genotypes with a dark colored testa (90%) were WL tolerant, whereas those with a light colored testa were all WL sensitive in both the RIL population and diversity panel. Testa integrity, measured by electrical conductivity of the leakage solute, was strongly associated with WL tolerance in the RIL population ( r G = −1.00) and the diversity panel ( r G = −0.90). Therefore, testa integrity can be effectively used in indirect selection for WL tolerance. Response to selection for WL tolerance at germination is confidently predicted enabling the adaptation of the ancient model pea to extreme precipitation events at germination.

show abstract

Response of cool-season grain legumes to waterlogging at flowering

Cited by 39 publications

References 24 publications

Waterlogging of Winter Crops at Early and Late Stages: Impacts on Leaf Physiology, Growth and Yield

Waterlogging of Winter Crops at Early and Late Stages: Impacts on Leaf Physiology, Growth and Yield

Waterlogging differentially affects yield and its components in wheat, barley, rapeseed and field pea depending on the timing of occurrence

Waterlogging Tolerance at Germination in Field Pea: Variability, Genetic Control, and Indirect Selection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About