Advertisement

Journal of Crop Science and Biotechnology

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 283–290 | Cite as

Evaluation of Flooding Tolerance of Soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.) in Greenhouse under Upland and Paddy Soil Conditions

  • Sanjeev Kumar Dhungana
  • Hong-Sik KimEmail author
  • Beom-Kyu Kang
  • Jeong-Hyun Seo
  • Hyun-Tae Kim
  • Sang-Ouk Shin
  • Chang-Hwan Park
  • Do-Yeon Kwak
Research Article

Abstract

Domestic rice production has exceeded the demand in Korea and cultivation of upland crops like soybean has been increased in converted paddy fields. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of two soil types, upland and paddy, on flooding tolerance of three tolerant and three susceptible soybean cultivars under greenhouse conditions. The flooding tolerance of soybean cultivars was evaluated based on chlorophyll content (CC), plant height (PH), and shoot dry weight (DW) measured under unflooded control and flooded treatments for 14 days. These three parameters were significantly (P < 0.01) affected by the soil type during the flooding and flood recovery periods of 14 days. Mean flooding tolerance index (FTI) of susceptible cultivars was higher than that of tolerant cultivars in upland soil. However, the FTI of tolerant cultivars was greater than that of susceptible cultivars in paddy soil at 14 days after flooding (DAF). A non-significant negative correlation between CC and DW and a significant (P < 0.01) positive correlation between PH and DW were found in both soils, whereas the negative correlation between CC and PH was non-significant in upland soil and was significant (P < 0.01) in paddy soil at 14 DAF. The results suggested that the flooding tolerance level of soybean cultivars could be influenced by soil type hence, it could be useful to consider designing flooding tolerance studies in different soil types. Also, field experiments could be designed to observe data until harvest to verify that with vegetative parameters of tolerant soybean varieties.

Key words

Flooding tolerance paddy soil soybean susceptible cultivar tolerant cultivar upland soil 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Rural Development Administration Agenda Project (No. PJ01186801), Republic of Korea.

References

  1. Ahmed F, Rafii MY, Ismail MR, Juraimi AS, Rahim HA, Asfaliza R, Latif MA. 2013. Waterlogging tolerance of crops: breeding, mechanism of tolerance, molecular approaches, and future prospects. BioMed Res. Int. 2013: Article ID 963525Google Scholar
  2. Arnold JG, Potter KN, King KW, Allen PM. 2005. Estimation of soil cracking and the effect on surface runoff in a Texas Blackland Prairie watershed. Hydrol. Processes 19: 589–603Google Scholar
  3. Bacanamwo M, Purcell LC. 1999a. Soybean root morphological and anatomical traits associated with acclimation to flooding. Crop Sci. 39: 143–149Google Scholar
  4. Bacanamwo M, Purcell LC. 1999b. Soybean dry matter and N accumulation responses to flooding stress, N sources and hypoxia. J. Exp. Bot. 50: 689–696Google Scholar
  5. Bailey-Serres J, Lee SC, Brinton E. 2012. Waterproofing crops: Effective flooding survival strategies. Plant Physiol. 160: 1698–1709Google Scholar
  6. Bailey-Serres J, Voesenek LACJ. 2008. Flooding stress: Acclimations and genetic diversity. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 59: 313–339Google Scholar
  7. Blaekwell PS, Wells EA. 1983. Limiting oxygen flux densities for oat root extension. Plant Soil 73: 129–139Google Scholar
  8. Blom CWPM, Voesenek LACJ. 1996. Flooding: The survival strategies of plants. Trends Ecol. Evolut. 11: 290–295Google Scholar
  9. Bowers GR, Russin JS. 1999. Soybean disease management, In LG Heatherly, HF Hodges, eds, Soybean Production in the Midsouth, CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton, FL, pp 235–237Google Scholar
  10. Bronswijk JJ, Hamminga W, Oostindie K. 1995. Rapid nutrient leaching to groundwater and surface water in clay soil areas. Eur. J. Agron. 4: 431–439Google Scholar
  11. Buttery BR, Buzzell RI. 1977. The relationship between chlorophyll content and rate of photosynthesis in soybeans. Can. J. Plant Sci. 57: 1–5Google Scholar
  12. Cannell R, Belford RK, Gales K, Thomson RJ, Webster CP. 1984. Effects of waterlogging and drought on winter wheat and winter barley grown on a clay and a sandy loam soil. Plant Soil 80: 53–66Google Scholar
  13. Cho J-W, Ji H-C, Yamakawa T. 2006. Comparison of photosynthetic response of two soybean cultivars to soil flooding. J. Fac. Agr., Kyushu Univ. 51: 227–232Google Scholar
  14. Colbourn P, Dowdell RJ. 1984. Denitrification in field soils. Plant Soil 76: 213–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dinka TM, Lascano RJ. 2012. Review paper: Challenges and limitations in studying the shrink-swell and crack dynamics of vertisol soils. Open J. Soil Sci. 2: 82–90Google Scholar
  16. Dou F, Soriano J, Tabien RE, Chen K. 2016. Soil texture and cultivar effects on rice (Oryza sativa, L.) grain yield, yield components and water productivity in three water regimes. PloS One 11: e0l50549Google Scholar
  17. Fiedler S, Vepraskas MJ, Richardson JL. 2007. Soil redox potential: Importance, field measurements, and observations. Adv. Agron. 94: 2–56Google Scholar
  18. Greve A, Andersen M, Acworth R. 2010. Investigations of soil cracking and preferential flow in a weighing lysimeter filled with cracking clay soil. J. Hydrol. 393: 105–113Google Scholar
  19. Gu J, Zhou Z, Li Z, Chen Y, Wang Z, Zhang H. 2017. Rice (Oryza sativa L.) with reduced chlorophyll content exhibit higher photosynthetic rate and efficiency, improved canopy light distribution, and greater yields than normally pigmented plants. Field Crops Res. 200: 58–70Google Scholar
  20. Kokubun M. 2013. Genetic and cultural improvement of soybean for waterlogged conditions in Asia. Field Crops Res. 152: 3–7Google Scholar
  21. Lee C, Choi MS, Kim HT, Yun HT, Lee B, Chung YS, Kim RW, Choi HK. 2015. Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merrill]: Importance as a crop and pedigree reconstruction of Korean varieties. Plant Breed. Biotechnol. 3: 179–196Google Scholar
  22. Linkemer G, Beard JE, Musgrave ME. 1998. Waterlogging effects on growth and yield components in late-planted soybean. Crop Sci. 38: 1576–1584Google Scholar
  23. Malik AI, Colmer TD, Lambers H, Setter TL, Schortemeyer M. 2002. Short-term waterlogging has long-term effects on the growth and physiology of wheat. New Phytol. 153: 225–236Google Scholar
  24. McKee WH, McKevlin MR. 1993. Geochemical processes and nutrient uptake by plants in hydric soils. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 12: 2197–2207Google Scholar
  25. Mittler R 2006. Abiotic stress, the field environment and stress combination. Trends Plant Sci. 11: 15–19Google Scholar
  26. Nanjo Y, Jang HY, Kim HS, Hiraga S, Woo SH, Komatsu S. 2014. Analyses of flooding tolerance of soybean varieties at emergence and varietal differences in their proteomes. Phytochemistry 106: 25–36Google Scholar
  27. Neira J, Ortiz M, Morales L, Acevedo E. 2015. Oxygen diffusion in soils: Understanding the factors and processes needed for modeling. CM. J. Agric. Res. 75: 35–44Google Scholar
  28. Oosterhuis DM, Scott HD, Hampton RE, Wullschleger SD. 1990. Physiological response of two soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] cultivars to short-term flooding. Environ. Exp. Bot. 30: 85–92Google Scholar
  29. Ort DR Merchant SS, Alric J, Barkan A, Blankenship RE et al. 2015. Redesigning photosynthesis to sustainably meet global food and bioenergy demand. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112: 8529–8536Google Scholar
  30. Ort DR, Zhu X, Melis A. 2011. Optimizing antenna size to maximize photosynthetic efficiency. Plant Physiol. 155: 79–85Google Scholar
  31. Pezeshki SR 2001. Wetland plant responses to soil flooding. Environ. Exp. Bot. 46: 299–312Google Scholar
  32. Reicosky DC, Millington RJ, Klute A, Peters DB. 1972. Patterns of water uptake and root distribution of soybean (Glycine max L.) in the presence of a water table. Agron. J. 64: 292–297Google Scholar
  33. Reyna N, Cornelious B, Shannon JG, Sneller CH. 2003. Evaluation of QTL for waterlogging tolerance in southern soybean germplasm. Crop Sci. 43: 2077–2082Google Scholar
  34. Rhine M, Stevens G, Shannon G, Wrather A, Sleper A. 2010. Yield and nutritional responses to waterlogging of soybean cultivars. Irrig. Sci. 28: 135–142Google Scholar
  35. Sallam A, Scott HD. 1987. Effects of prolonged flooding on soybeans during vegetative growth. Soil Sci. 144: 61–66Google Scholar
  36. Scott HD, DeAngulo J, Daniels MB, Wood LS. 1989. Flood duration effects on soybean growth and yield. Agron. J. 81: 631–636Google Scholar
  37. Six J, Paustian K, Elloitt ET, Combrink C. 2000. Soil structure and soil organic matter, I. distribution of aggregate size classes and aggregate associated carbon. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 64: 681–689Google Scholar
  38. Slattery RA, VanLoocke A, Bernacchi CJ, Zhu XG, Ort DR. 2017. Photosynthesis, light use efficiency, and yield of reduced-chlorophyll soybean mutants in field conditions. Front. Plant Sci. 8: 549Google Scholar
  39. Stanley CD, Kaspar TC, Taylor HM. 1980. Soybean top and root response to temporary water tables imposed at three different stages of growth. Agron. J. 72: 341–346Google Scholar
  40. Statistics Korea. 2018. Government Complex-Daejeon. Seo-gu, Daejeon, Republic of Korea, http://kostat.go.kr/portal/eng/pressReleases/2/l/index.board Google Scholar
  41. Stewart RD, Abou Najm MR, Rupp DE, Lane JW, Uribe HC, Arumi JL, Selker JS. 2015. Hillslope run off thresholds with shrink-swell clay soils. Hydrol. Process. 29: 557–571Google Scholar
  42. Takahashi H, Yamauchi T, Colmer TD, Nakazono M. 2014. Aerenchyma formation in plants, In J van Dongen, F Licausi, eds, Low-Oxygen Stress in Plants, Springer, Vienna, pp 247–265Google Scholar
  43. Taki O, Godwin R, Leeds-Harrison P. 2006. The creation of longitudinal cracks in shrinking soils to enhance seedling emergence. Part I. The effect of soil structure. Soil Use Manag. 22: 1–10Google Scholar
  44. Tan XZ, Shao DG, Liu HH, Yang FS, Xiao C, Yang HD. 2013. Effects of alternate wetting and drying irrigation on percolation and nitrogen leaching in paddy fields. Paddy Water Environ. 11:381–395Google Scholar
  45. Tsubo M, Fukai S, Basnayake J, Tuong T, Bouman B, Harnpichitvitaya D. 2007. Effects of soil clay content on water balance and productivity in rainfed lowland rice [Oryza sativa] ecosystem in northeast Thailand. Plant Prod. Sci. 10: 232–241Google Scholar
  46. Valliyodan B, Van Toai T, Alves J, de Fatima P, Goulart P, Lee J, Fritschi F, Rahman M, Islam R, Shannon J, Nguyen H. 2014. Expression of root-related transcription factors associated with flooding tolerance of soybean (Glycine max). Int. J. Mol. Sci. 15: 17622–17643Google Scholar
  47. Van Nguyen L, Takahashi R, Githiri SM, Rodriguez TO, Tsutsumi N et al. 2017. Mapping quantitative trait loci for root development under hypoxia conditions in soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). Theor. Appl. Genet. 130: 743–755Google Scholar
  48. Van Toai TT, Beuerlein AF, Schmitthenner SK, St Martin SK. 1994. Genetic variability for flooding tolerance in soybeans. Crop Sci. 34: 1112–1115Google Scholar
  49. Van Toai TT, St Martin SK, Chase K, Boru G, Schnipke V, Schmitthenner AF, Lark KG. 2001. Identification of a QTL associated with tolerance of soybean to soil waterlogging. Crop Sci. 41: 1247–1252Google Scholar
  50. Vartapetian BB, Jackson M. 1997. Plant adaptations to anaerobic stress. Ann. Bot. 79: 3–20Google Scholar
  51. Voesenek LACJ, Bailey-Serres J. 2015. Flood adaptive traits and processes: An overview. New Phytol. 206: 57–73Google Scholar
  52. Wegner LH. 2010. Oxygen transport in waterlogged plants, In S Mancuso, S Shabala, eds, Waterlogging Signalling and Tolerance in Plants, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 3–22Google Scholar
  53. Ye H, Song L, Chen H, Valliyodan B, Cheng P et al. 2018. A major natural genetic variation associated with root system architecture and plasticity improves waterlogging tolerance and yield in soybean. Plant Cell Environ. 41: 2169–2182Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Society of Crop Science and Springer 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjeev Kumar Dhungana
    • 1
  • Hong-Sik Kim
    • 1
    Email author
  • Beom-Kyu Kang
    • 1
  • Jeong-Hyun Seo
    • 1
  • Hyun-Tae Kim
    • 1
  • Sang-Ouk Shin
    • 1
  • Chang-Hwan Park
    • 1
  • Do-Yeon Kwak
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Southern Area Crop Science, National Institute of Crop ScienceRural Development AdministrationMiryangRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations