Advertisement

Plant and Soil

, Volume 429, Issue 1–2, pp 469–481 | Cite as

Physiological traits associated with reductions in grain number in wheat and barley under waterlogging

  • Romina P. de San Celedonio
  • L. Gabriela Abeledo
  • Daniel J. Miralles
Regular Article

Abstract

Aims

Negative effects of waterlogging on wheat and barley yield are expressed mainly through reductions in grain number per plant. Physiological traits associated with reductions in grain number of wheat and barley plants waterlogged at different growth stages during preanthesis were evaluated.

Methods

Two pot experiments were carried out under contrasting environments, where wheat and barley plants were exposed to waterlogging at four different ontogenic stages, from emergence to anthesis. Physiological traits associated with grain number determination were measured at anthesis and at physiological maturity.

Results

Waterlogging occurring during the spike growth period significantly reduced grain number per plant up to 70% in wheat and 60% in barley. Reductions in grain number per plant in wheat were mainly related to decreases in grain number per spike, while in barley grain number reductions were related to decreases in the number of spikes. In both species waterlogging produced spike growth reductions that were associated with reductions in the number of fertile florets per spike, without effects on fruiting efficiency.

Conclusions

The effect of waterlogging on grain number per plant differed between wheat and barley. Waterlogging reduced grain establishment in wheat by affecting the growth capacity of spikes and, consequently, reducing the number of fertile florets per spike. In barley, the main effect of waterlogging was through reductions in the number of spikes per plant, without significant changes in grain number per spike. These differences between species open ways to analyze the impact of different management practices (i.e. nitrogen fertilization, plant population) as alternative to mitigate the negative effect of waterlogging on grain yield.

Keywords

Fertile florets Flooding Fruiting efficiency Grain number Hordeum vulgareTriticum aestivum

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was financed by projects from the National Agency for Science Promotion (ANPCyT, PICT 1245) and the University of Buenos Aires (UBACYT 20020120100258BA). R.P. de San Celedonio has a scholarship from the National Council for Scientific Research (CONICET).

References

  1. Abbate PE, Andrade FH, Culot JP (1995) The effects of radiation and nitrogen on number of grains in wheat. J Agric Sci 124:351–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbate PE, Andrade FH, Lázaro L, Bariffi JH, Berardocco HG, Inza VH, Marturano F (1998) Grain yield increase in recent argentine wheat cultivars. Crop Sci 38:1203–1209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alzueta I, Abeledo LG, Mignone CM, Miralles DJ (2012) Differences between wheat and barley in leaf and tillering coordination under contrasting nitrogen and sulfur conditions. Eur J Agron 41:92–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arisnabarreta S, Miralles DJ (2006a) Floret development and grain setting in near isogenic two- and six-rowed barley lines (Hordeum vulgare L.). Field Crop Res 96:466–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arisnabarreta S, Miralles DJ (2006b) Yield responsiveness in two- and six-rowed barley grown in contrasting nitrogen environments. J Agron Crop Sci 192:178–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Arisnabarreta S, Miralles DJ (2008a) Critical period for grain number establishment of near isogenic lines of two- and six-rowed barley. Field Crop Res 107:196–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arisnabarreta S, Miralles DJ (2008b) Radiation effects on potential number of grains per spike and biomass partitioning in two- and six-rowed near isogenic barley lines. Field Crop Res 107:203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Arisnabarreta S, Miralles DJ (2010) Nitrogen and radiation effects during the active spike-growth phase on floret development and biomass partitioning in 2- and 6-rowed barley isolines. Crop Pasture Sci 61:578–587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Armstrong W (1979) Aeration in higher plants. In: Woolhouse HW (ed) Advances in Botanical Research, vol 7. Academic Press Inc., London, pp 225–332Google Scholar
  10. Belford RK (1981) Response of winter wheat to prolonged waterlogging under outdoor conditions. J Agric Sci 97:557–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cannell RQ, Belford RK, Gales K, Dennis CW, Prew RD (1980) Effects of waterlogging at different stages of development on the growth and yield of winter wheat. J Sci Food Agric 31:117–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cannell R, Belford R, Gales K, Thomson R, Webster C (1984) Effects of waterlogging and drought on winter wheat and winter barley grown on a clay and a sandy loam soil. Plant Soil 80:53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de San Celedonio RP, Abeledo LG, Miralles DJ (2014a) Identifying the critical period for waterlogging on yield and its components in wheat and barley. Plant Soil 378:265–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de San Celedonio RP, Micheloud JR, Abeledo GL, Miralles DJ, Slafer GA (2014b) Riesgo de anegamiento en trigo (Tritucum aestivum L.) para distintas localidades de la región triguera argentina. Ci Suelo 32:233–246Google Scholar
  15. de San Celedonio RP, Abeledo LG, Brihet JM, Miralles DJ (2016) Waterlogging affects leaf and Tillering dynamics in wheat and barley. J Agron Crop Sci 202:409–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de San Celedonio RP, Abeledo LG, Mantese AI, Miralles DJ (2017) Differential root and shoot biomass recovery in wheat and barley with transient waterlogging during preflowering. Plant Soil 417:481–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Di Rienzo JA, Casanoves F, Balzarini MG, Gonzalez L, Tablada M, Robledo CW (2011) InfoStat Profesional. FCA, Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina, Grupo InfoStatGoogle Scholar
  18. Ferrante A, Savin R, Slafer GA (2010) Floret development of durum wheat in response to nitrogen availability. J Exp Bot 61:4351–4359Google Scholar
  19. Ferrante A, Savin R, Slafer GA (2013) Floret development and grain setting differences between modern durum wheats under contrasting nitrogen availability. J Exp Bot 64:169–184CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Fischer RA (1975) Yield potential of dwarf spring wheat and the effect of shading. Crop Sci 15:607–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fischer RA (1985) Number of kernels in wheat crops and the influence of solar radiation and temperature. J Agric Sci 105:447–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fischer RA (2007) Understanding the physiological basis of yield potential in wheat. J Agric Sci 145:99–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. García del Moral MB, García del Moral LF (1995) Tiller production and survival in relation to grain yield in winter and spring barley. Field Crop Res 44:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. González FG, Slafer GA, Miralles DJ (2003) Floret development and spike growth as affected by photoperiod during stem elongation in wheat. Field Crop Res 81:29–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. González FG, Slafer GA, Miralles DJ (2005) Floret development and survival in wheat plants exposed to contrasting photoperiod and radiation environments during stem elongation. Funct Plant Biol 32:189–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. González FG, Miralles DJ Slafer GA (2011) Wheat floret survival as related to pre-anthesis spike growth. J Exp Bot 62:4889–4901Google Scholar
  27. Herzog M, Striker GG, Colmer TD, Pedersen O (2016) Mechanisms of waterlogging tolerance in wheat–a review of root and shoot physiology. Plant Cell Environ 39:1068–1086CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Hoffman E and Viega L (2011) Caracterización preliminar de cultivares de trigo y cebada por su comportamiento al estrés hídrico. In: Castro AJ, Hoffman E, Viega L (ed) Limitaciones para la productividad de trigo y cebada. CYTED, Montevideo, pp 53–57Google Scholar
  29. Kirby EJM (1988) Analysis of leaf, stem and ear growth in wheat from terminal spikelet stage to anthesis. Field Crop Res 18:127–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Marti J, Savin R, Slafer GA (2015) Wheat yield as affected by length of exposure to waterlogging during stem elongation. J Agron Crop Sci 201:473–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Miralles DJ, Katz SD, Colloca A, Slafer GA (1998) Floret development in near isogenic wheat lines differing in plant height. Field Crop Res 59:21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miralles DJ, Richards RA, Slafer GA (2000) Duration of the stem elongation period influences the number of fertile florets in wheat and barley. Aust J Plant Physiol 27:931–940Google Scholar
  33. Olgun M, Metin Kumlay A, Cemal Adiguzel M, Caglar A (2008) The effect of waterlogging in wheat (T. Aestivum L.). Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section B - Soil & Plant Science 58:193–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ponnamperuma FN (1984) Effects of flooding on soils. In: Koslowski TT (ed) Flooding and plant growth. Academic Press Inc, Orlando, pp 10–42Google Scholar
  35. Prystupa P, Savin R, Slafer GA (2004) Grain number and its relationship with dry matter, N and P in the spikes at heading in response to N×P fertilization in barley. Field Crop Res 90:245–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Robertson D, Zhang H, Palta JA, Colmer T, Turner NC (2009) Waterlogging affects the growth, development of tillers, and yield of wheat through a severe, but transient, N deficiency. Crop Pasture Sci 60:578–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sayre K, Van Ginkel M, Rajaram S, Ortiz-Monasterio I (1994) Tolerance to waterlogging losses in spring bread wheat: effect of time of onset on expression. Annual Wheat Newsletter 40:165–171Google Scholar
  38. Setter TL, Waters I (2003) Review of prospects for germplasm improvement for waterlogging tolerance in wheat, barley and oats. Plant Soil 253:1–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Setter TL, Burguess P, Waters I, Kuo J (1999) Genetic diversity of barley and wheat for waterlogging tolerance in Western Australia. Proceeding of the 9th Australian Barley Technical Symposium, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  40. Slafer GA, Elia M, Savin R, García GA, Terrile II, Ferrante A, Miralles DJ, González FG (2015) Fruiting efficiency: an alternative trait to further rise wheat yield. Food and Energy Security 4:92–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Waddington SR, Cartwright PM, Wall PC (1983) A quantitative scale of spike initial and pistil development in barley and wheat. Ann Bot 51:119–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Zadoks JC, Chang TT, Konzak CF (1974) A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res (Oxf) 14:415–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Romina P. de San Celedonio
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • L. Gabriela Abeledo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Daniel J. Miralles
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Cátedra de Cerealicultura, Facultad de AgronomíaUniversidad de Buenos AiresBuenos AiresArgentina
  2. 2.CONICET (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas)Buenos AiresArgentina
  3. 3.IFEVA (Instituto de Investigaciones Fisiológicas y Ecológicas Vinculadas a la Agricultura)Buenos AiresArgentina

Personalised recommendations